Rules state that properties can be mortgaged at any time. But if I can't raise enough money to pay rent, I am bankrupt and out of the game.
Mortgaging properties just prior to handing them over to the new owner would be a nuisance. Since the new owner is required to pay a 10% fee to the bank. As the player being bankrupted, am I allowed to reduce the spoils I turn over in this fashion?

Note a similar question about making deals with other players when going bankrupt.

  • 1
    I'm no monopoly expert so I won't post this as an answer because I'm not sure, but as far as I know, not only are you able to do it, it is the most commonly done action by a player being bankrupted because it could be a means to get enough money to stop being bankrupted.
    – Ivo
    Commented May 30, 2015 at 22:20

3 Answers 3


Basically, you can mortgage properties to try to avoid bankruptcy. But when it is obvious that you can't, you are supposed to restore the status quo ante, (before you landed on the other person's property), and hand over your property to your creditor as they "were." That is, mortgaged or unmortgaged, as they were at the beginning of your turn.

If your debt is to another player, you must turn over to that player all that you have of value and retire from the game. In making this settlement, if you own houses or hotels, you must return these to the Bank in exchange for money to the extent of one-half the amount paid for them; this cash is given to the creditor.

  • 2
    Do you have a rules quote for this? As Ivo Becker's comment said, I usually see people mortgage everything they can before giving up.
    – GendoIkari
    Commented May 31, 2015 at 1:25
  • 5
    It's a start, but I don't think that answers the question. It clarifies that you must sell your houses, but doesn't say anything one way or the other about mortgaging properties.
    – GendoIkari
    Commented May 31, 2015 at 1:38
  • 1
    @GendoIkari: The rules aren't explicit on this point. I draw certain inferences from what is not said. Others may reasonably interpret them the other way.
    – Tom Au
    Commented May 31, 2015 at 1:54
  • 1
    @jprete: The way I've played, a player can try to "deal" his way out of bankruptcy. Certainly, the rules allow him to sell houses and mortgage property to this end. Letting the player make "strategic" deals with third parties is icing on the cake. If he doesn't succeed, the "deals" have to be undone (except for the sale of houses and hotels to the bank for half price in cash), and payment made based on the status quo ante.
    – Tom Au
    Commented May 31, 2015 at 14:16
  • 1
    Right, I think the idea is to avoid the scenario where player A lands on B's property, but doesn't want B to win, so they sell all their stuff to C for $10, so that B only gets $10. But selling their stuff to C for enough money to cover the rent they just landed on is okay. Selling everything to C before the dice are rolled for $10 would also be okay, though very unsportsmanlike.
    – swbarnes2
    Commented Jun 1, 2015 at 23:48

Straight from the Classic Monopoly Rules:

You are declared bankrupt if you owe more than you can pay either to another player or to the Bank.

So my interpretation of this, consistent with commentary on Board Game Geek, is that any and all attempted transactions are contingent on the right to perform transactions: namely, avoiding bankruptcy by raising sufficient funds to pay the debt.

Consider that your assets are now controlled by a trustee, as in real life, and released back to you if and only if you can release the bankruptcy; otherwise the trustee will not approve the transactions.


You can mortgage property if it makes you enough money to clear your debt. You can't mortgage things just to screw over the person who bankrupted you by forcing them to pay the 10% mortgage penalty.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .