I have worked as a Lender(Home Loans and Small Business Loans). Happy to discuss loans related queries.
I am not giving any financial or legal advice here. So consider your situation before making any financial or legal decisions.
The views are my own and do not represent ANZ or any other bank.
What do you typically need to get a loan for a studio (30-40sqm) approved?
Everything else is the same. Apart from LVR. LVR max is 60%(this is ANZ). Could be different with other banks. Also, exceptions are made but haven't seen one myself.
Let's say I have a father in law with assets in the tens of millions and willing to go as a guarantor on a property.
Are there any benefits to having the guarantor? Any reduction in maximum LVR etc?
Thanks
You might not have to pay LMI. Thats really it.
Nowadays Banks are either changing or simply withdrawing this from the market as it fails the benefit test (what benefit does the Guarantor get?).
I think you got the answer already but just to re-iterate. You won't have to pay LMI. And that's it. There are so many other things to it bit you probably don't need to know all of that.
Let’s say you come into financial hardship. You’ve had loan for 10+ years but something occurred and you can’t afford to pay the loan for a while (say 12 months)…what steps do the bank take to help the customer with their hardship?
You mentioned a ‘1000’ steps before foreclosure. Would you elaborate a little please.
I haven't worked specifically in collections area but have heard things from colleagues and friends. The only advise I can offer is call the bank and talk to them. They will make arrangements on the basis of specific situation and try to work out a solution. One thing one shouldn't do is stop communicating.
But I do not the exact steps that are followed and at what stages.
If you have an offset you should remove funds ready for interest payments. Because as soon as you miss a repayment the Bank will freeze offset.
Then find out from the bank about a repayment holiday, you should do this ASAP (or know the rules when you get the loan!), see what you have to do to qualify.
Basically banks will issue a repayment demand at 60 days, full repayment at 90 days and Court action after that - usually 90-120 days.
Usually banks are loathe to issue a credit default, because they know 90% of issues are loss of income, and when people get a new job they can suddenly afford the repayment again (surprise!). Of course this will all change with comprehensive credit reporting - banks will know what you have defaulted at 30 days for any credit provided by any lender (so CC, Car, Mortgage, Biz loan, IPs, etc) and will be willing to take more drastic action.
This simply isn't true for home loans. We don't freeze offset accounts. What would be the point? And court action most definitely does not occur after 90 days. Do you know how many people we'd be taking to court if that was the case?
Also not sure what credit listing has to do with them being able to afford the repayment again when they get a new job. Being able to afford your repayments again doesn't mean you don't get reported for defaulting on your payments when you didn't have a job.
If people stop paying their interest payments, Banks certainly do freeze withdrawals from Accounts.
Thats exactly the first thing the Banks do!
Because the Banks are trying to limit losses.
They are certainly not going to give you more money to spend.
And court action most definitely does not occur after 90 days
Court action can and does take place after 90 days. Why couldn't it? The default has occurred, the people haven't paid the interest required, a full repayment has been issued and 'ignored' (or not actioned), now just because the Banks MAY decide to take longer than 90 days, does not mean they don't have that power.
Also not sure what credit listing has to do with them being able to afford the repayment again when they get a new job.
If the Bank wants the loan off their books (usually they do) they want the person to refinance out, or sell the property, the Obviously having a credit default hurts the ability of the person to move lenders.
This may apply more to Property investors than people with just one property… (hence more complicated).
@Ti-au: Which bank do you work for that freezes offset accounts as soon as you miss a payment? Offset accounts get used as transaction/savings accounts that people put their pay into. Can you imagine the fallout if someone is going through financial hardship and you freeze all their money so they can't afford to buy food or pay their bills?
I'm not saying court action can't happen after 90 days, it just never does in reality because it's extremely easy to fall 3 months behind and we can't litigate everyone. It costs money to take people to court. In my experience, litigation almost never happens for unsecured debts, most of the time they just get sold off. For home loans, I've never seen an account go to litigation that was <6 months in arrears and even then only if we have had 0 contact. Mostly people either know they're in an unrecoverable position and choose to self sell or we work with them until their situation improves. I can't speak for every bank though or how they conduct their business.
I work in collections for big 4 bank and generally as long as you are communicating with us, we will work with you to prevent foreclosure and the account being sent to legal. Legal proceedings only happen if the customer does not respond to contact from the bank. Self sale is a lot more common if there's simply no way to service the loan now and in the future.
What the bank does to help the customer is entirely dependent on the circumstances. What's the cause for financial hardship? Are you able to make any payments at all during this time? If so, can do a temporary reduced payment arrangement. What will be your financial situation after 12 months? Will you be fully able to service the loan? Pay more to catch up on the arrears? How sure are you about how long it will take you to recover?
The most important thing is being open about your circumstances and proactive about maintaining contact with the bank. So many times we will put a hold on repayments for 1-2 months or set up a reduced payment for a few months and tell the customer to get back in touch with us at the end of that period and they never do. They wait for us to chase them which doesn't always happen because each case manager has a huge workload of clients they are managing. So if we say update us at the end of July and you don't, then we attempt a couple of calls that go straight to voicemail, we may not get around to contacting you again until August or September and by then there's been 2 months of no action on the account and things get escalated.
How many home loans do you think have been approved where the borrower has lied or not fully disclosed their financial situation (i.e. fraud)? Given comprehensive credit reporting is a thing soon, do you know if banks will be going over their books to cross check this?
I do not know how many liar loans exist and have no clue if banks will try to find them out from existing book.
But if I was gave money to someone and they have always paid on time. I won't waste my time, trying to figure out what was said at the time when the money was given out. I get my money back. That's all I care. I hope that clarifies the situation a bit.
This is actually an interesting one.
Say you lend out money to all types of people - would you assume they are all telling the truth? No you don't want to be made an ass, so you assume everything they say is a lie and you cross check everything, and then further develop systems to get more and more sophisticated to detect errors, lies, etc. So you assume 100% of applications have errors and create systems to flag the errors and then investigate more.
(And This is the big thing that UBS keeps leaving out of their reports on how there are this many applications with errors - "look there are errors, lies, etc!", Well so what - when did any lender actually believe they were telling the truth to begin with?).
Generally the default rate is always under 1% so it's low (usually 0.5% actually), and its almost always people losing their job or income which stops people paying their mortgage, very rarely is it people who have "overborrowed" - meaning saddled with payments they could never afford.
(0.5% x 90% due to loss of income, meaning 0.05% for other reasons).
As brokers earn 50% of their income in trails (delayed payment) there is actually a disincentive for the broker to do that. Congrats on the RC for saying we should get rid of it!
In terms of comprehensive credit reports - banks have to pay to access them, as such I don't see them running them constantly against customers, also the applicants pay may of increased or bought an investment property and you are not seeing the rent as income is not on a credit file.
What could be very problematic is that when people miss a payment within 30 days (before it was basically 90-120 days) due to job loss, now the system will flag and the Bank may start to investigate. Even if you get one missed payments, in a credit crunch no other bank will lend and the bank could force you to sell if they don't like your financials. So people either could be forced to sell sooner or if they do mange to get a job will be stuck with same lender watching as thier interest rates rise over time. I actually wrote about this but no one cared/s…
Im read it all and grateful for your effort. Regarding the last paragraph, is that a fact or … ?
Last paragraph is untrue. The whole point of comprehensive credit reporting is so that you're not being assessed on just your missed payments. Before, the banks only reported when you missed a payment so when lenders looked at that report, they only saw how many times you've missed payments, not all the times you paid on time. CCR is meant to stop periods of financial distress from drastically affecting your overall credit score because lenders will be able to see 22 months of on time payments and 2 months where you lost your job and fell behind in the last 2 years.
Also bank would never force you to sell property after one missed payment, that's ridiculous.
@Astrohawke: Bullahit. Majority of people already pay on time, so why would they need to show that?
THe Comprehensive credit in Australia reporting CAN showed missed payments as early as 14 days (as per legislation).
CCR reports are like this:
CBA (bank) - XXXX (product) - $110,000 (amount) - time held - Not in Default (status)
Credit declines happen at the start of the process automatically because the banks system flag defaults automatically. So even with your great history, no bank will care, because you are in default to their system.
As the Banks issue Bonds not MBS, they are going to keep the same level of good conduct - so it does not matter how good you have been in the past (just like the present with Negative Reporting).
Just because you took the line that CCR will show your good conduct does not mean it matters -
because why do you need to show good conduct, when it ALREADY shows bad conduct?
And what are you (as a lender) interested in? BAD conduct.
Is the person in default now or in the last 5 years?
No = Lend
Yes = Don't Lend
Also bank would never force you to sell property after one missed payment, that's ridiculous.
I NEVER said that - Do NOT put words in to my mouth.
I DID say that if you miss 1 payment (listed within 14 days), then other lenders seeing that will deny credit (so many reasons - NCCP: fails servicing, change of circumstances, etc), whereas before you had 90-120 days to refinance before it marked your credit report, which would be good if you lost your job because it takes an average of 45 days to find a new job.
Do you see the problem there?
Positive credit reporting gives you 14 days
& Negative credit reporting gives you 90-120 days.
Which is better for people trying to keep their homes?
Perhaps that explains why the US & UK was affected so much by the last GFC (UK had introduced positive credit reporting by then)
And Aust, NZ & France were the least affected (ALL Neg reporting).
(And just to be clear - Was positive credit reporting responsible for the downturn = of course not, don't be silly).
@Ti-au: CCR is being used to generate a credit score. Hard to get an accurate credit score when it can only go down via negative reporting. That's why you need to show good conduct.
You are also seriously exaggerating on how creditors view history. Someone loses their job for 6 months 5 years ago and falls into default on their credit card but after that they have had a steady job, good income and have been on time with every single payment and CCR shows that. That's grounds for auto deny of lending? Why?
I get that with negative reporting banks aren't as aware of your current circumstances which gives you the opportunity to trick them into taking on risk. That's not really a good thing. Some people used that to get further into debt when they were already struggling with meeting the commitments of the debts they already had.
In any case, refinancing is not the solutions when you can't meet your repayments. If you're struggling now, how will things change after refinancing especially when there's usually a fee involved.
For your last paragraph, I kind of heard the opposite (anecdotal). I was under the impression that under financial difficulties the bank would be more inclined to work with the owner rather thank risk calling in a bunch of loans and flooding the market with properties (which was one of the factors that led to the last financial crisis).
Banks deal with so many loans they have systems. No matter how much a bank wants to work with a person if the System says issue default letter at XX days - then they will issue default letters.
Refinancing was The favoured tactic - gave people more time (so the Bank didn't have to take enforcement action as -something- was happening: "I'm refinancing", "o'h well we don't need to take enforcement action, as its getting off our books"), and banks were getting rid of "risky" loans (actually not really as the people who had lost their job just got new jobs - but from the banks perspective and potentially reporting requirements it was seen as de-risking).
Positive credit reporting will stop people refinancing with another lender, so that avenue is now closed off.
So now the bank will push for a sale, and if people lose equity - who cares right? They are off your balance sheet.
With the last down turn, Banks did slow sales, however that was based on the numbers they held themselves (including Developments, where they held 60%+ of the units). So obviously if you hold 60 units in a development you don't want to fire sale them. But this was houses they held…
And people could refinance.
@Ti-au: There's a long path between the default notice being issued and the bank forcing you to sell, it's not really the same thing. The system may decide that the default notice should be issued after XX days but it doesn't determine it's time to sell the property. A person who's working with the customer decides that.
@Astrohawke: So your telling me that a consumer can be 260 days in default and the Bank does nothing? 400 days?
I guess if they have a strong enough equity position…..
Considering I have been in court rooms where the Banks are seeking repossession orders I call BS.
@Ti-au: I never said they do nothing. It entirely depends on the individual circumstances.
260 days delinquent and haven't heard a peep from them, not answering calls or responding to emails. Bank sends someone to physically knock on their door. Assess for loss and send to legal.
260 days delinquent and we've been talking to them every few months. Going through some medical treatments, not working and have medical expenses. Making partial payments each month as per agreement with us. There's no issues. Once they go back to work we do a payment test for 6 months to make sure things are stable and they can service the loan then capitalise the arrears.
Our computer system doesn't decide when it's time to take someone's house and it never should.
How do you view people who have a deposit for a home loan of at least 50% but basically most of it is from inheritance and don't have much outside of that when looking bank history? Does it raise any red flags at all?
There is nothing wrong with being born rich. As long as you can show you can service the loan you are borrowing. You are good to go.
Fair point. Thanks
I am not giving any financial or legal advise here.
I’d be hesitant to take advice from someone who spells it wrong.
Hehe… fair comment… you are free to keep scrolling until you reach the next topic…
If a married couple is buying a property where one of them works full time on a long term contract (3+ years) but the other works multiple short term contracts per year (4-5 contracts if 2-3 months per year consistently for the last 3 years) would that cause any problems? I am just unsure how the short term contracts will be seen. Will it count against them?
I can't remember policy on top of my head but I think if the gap between jobs is minimal it should be fine… the policy may vary from 1 bank to another anyway…. but I have seen this trend is quite common in IT Industry and bankers understand that. So short answer is, yes it should work.. again other things will be assessed too.. like loan to value ratio and spare income every month etc.
Hi, thanks for the Ama, Re :Assessment of small business loan work, if I were to buy a Subway or a Tatts franchise for $300k and I have 50% or 55% of share and rest I want it to be financed from ANZ then would it matter if I have just quit my job for further studies and this business opportunity has arisen?!
First of all ANZ doesn't lend to subways. And yes it does matter because one of the things they look at is plan B. I don't know if you have any other option but normally it is that you can go back to your previous job and if you can still afford the debt.
Also, not sure if you have a home loan or other debt. If you are not able to afford that, as is on paper and asking for more debt. It will make the situation even harder.
So if I get back to my previous job and show ability to service the present debts I have - everyone has a homeloan !! and want to buy a Tatts or a post office how would things work.
Also , if I am able to service my present debts well and also looking for a business loan , what is assessed ? Is it the serviceability of home loan totally different than serviceability of business loan or both are combined are reviewed to see if I can get a business loan ?
Short anser us bith are looked. All the director's personal statement of Financial Position, new entities forecasted income and if you are buying existing business then vendor financials will be looked at too.
Also, not everyone has a home and home loan. I have seen people making heaps in business and still never buying a house.
Hi,
Athena v TicToc, which one is better?
They are both good. Depends on what suits who. Making generic comment about 1 being better is unfair in my opinion.
Can I not declare/disclose that I have a mortgage in new Zealand when applying for a home loan in Australia?
Good Question 😊
which means…. ?
Sorry mate.. i was hoping you will get message.
It means
Sorry.. I can't guide you to do the wrong thing. You should declare all assets and liabilities… whether you do or don't is upto you.
woooosh
What is the risk of the smaller companies going under if I have a home loan with them? e.g. Athena / Tic Toc
If I have a loan with them and they go into voluntary administration, can the loan be transferred to someone else?
I personally won't be worried about getting a loan from these companies. Just because of that reason.
i heard companies like loans.com.au (run by First mac) aren't very safe as if it goes under /bankrupt it is not insured by the government…how true is that,?
But you owe them the money. Worst come to worst. You can refinance to different financial organization.
But again there is high chance, my knowledge is limited on this subject. I personally do not bank with these ones.
oh but i have like 50k in one of the offset accounts- apparently offset accounts aren't insured by the government?
Fair point. I don't know how that will be dealt with but I am hoping our highly regulated industry will have some checks in place.
apparently offset accounts aren't insured by the government?
Not even saving account is safe. SENATE PASSES ‘BAIL IN’ LAW – HOW SAFE IS YOUR CASH NOW?
EDIT: Remember Cyprus 2013 ?
You are correct they are not insured, i confirmed this with them when i had a loan with them. So if they go under, best case is they deduct that amount against your outstanding loan amount. Worst case, it is used as payment to its creditors and you can kiss your money goodbye. Currently with a medium sized lender and have confirmation that my money in the offset is guaranteed by the government (same as a savings account).
Is there an easy way to work out your own borrowing capacity on a second property if you have rough estimates of equity, rental income and your own financials?
It is not hard once you know the concept but can't explain it here. ANZ guys are open on weekends too. Why not call and ask a lender. It's free. Other banks might have lenders available on phone too.
ANZ borrowing calculator not a bad start
https://www.anz.com.au/personal/home-loans/calculators-tools…
Thanks, I did try that one, unfortunately it doesn't take into account equity in current property. It is one of the better ones though.
Just look to see if you can afford the new loan amount on principal and interest repayments if the rates hit 6.5%. If the answer is yes. You should be good. But again best way is call and let the lender do it.
Equity isn't a difficult question in the context of it all. Try stick to 80% on any owned/to be purchased properties and you're good. ANZ also has a calc on cost of purchasing but the easiest way is add 5% stamps and you're gold.
I have a question.
30K salary, ZERO debt (not even HECS).
Very frugal with money, so I am an excellent saver.
Healthy deposit
Looking to borrow 200K.
Was told by a broker that my borrowing power will increase if I am buying for investment, as the potential rental income for the property will be calculated into my yearly income, therefore allowing me to borrow the amount that I require.
Seems too good to be true - Is this correct? Or did I hear it wrong?
Depends on rental yield but if buying in a regional area this could be possible with mortgage rates so low.
Your broker is right. I am assuming they would have done the numbers in calculator before saying that. But keep in mind that his/her job is to get you the loan. You need to work your own expenses and see if you can pay it.
And if you don't trust the broker at all. Just call any big 4 and ask for your borrowing capacity.
Thank you very much 😊
No, he's not my broker. Just a broker I chatted to on a social night at a business centre I work at. It sure got me thinking, because I've had a couple of chats to another broker and because I'm a creative (mix of salary and freelance wages), she barely wanted to deal with me and every question I had with either answered with another question or was a very vague answer.
Dammit, I'm going to get me a big fat yes. This broker I chatted to at the social night told me a lot of other things no one seems to reveal. All of which makes me know I will get the loan I want.
Do you think banks have been irresponsible with their lending?
I didn't realise you asked specifically for lending. So just said yes as a short answer before. For lending I would say depends on the case in discussion.
I know there are residential and commercial credit ratings
If going for a commercial loan, do they look at the residential credit history?
From what I believe commercial is a bit more linient as generally the nanny hold your hand rules don't fully apply to commercial loans.
I am assuming you are referring to credit rating of entity when saying commercial credit rating. And yes they do look at personal credit rating of directors/owners when lending money.
Hi GuyfromMelbourne,
I am actually very intrigued in your profession and I would like to ask a series of questions. One being, I find it interesting with all the news stating home loans have tighter regulations now, and then home loans easing in regulations based on the liberals being in power.
What I ask is, I see that a lot of people earn a average income of between 67k to 100k, yet they have multiple properties. On the news it says that they are positively geared properties.
Technically speaking, does that mean, as I already have a property investment which is negatively geared though, I can get a loan and secure a property easily if it is positively geared and build up my profile?
Even on the news, you see people who earn very little, buy cheap 100 to 300k properties which are positively geared and keep at it. in 10 years they amass over 10 properties.
So it is actually easy and possible to do that with a learning big 4 bank, or they are going to the small lenders?
The borrowing capacity calculations used to be very lenient around 2-3 years ago and then things were tightened in last couple of years. Now they are relaxing rules a little bit but still no where close to what it used to be.
Now coming to the topic of someone earning 67-100k and having 10 properties or multiple properties. Because they are positively geared. There is more to the story than what we hear. Can you keep borrowing just with rental income? NO.
The banks were looking at principal and interest repayments on atleast 7.25% to see if the customer can afford them even for investment property loans. It just changed around couple of weeks ago.
If they lied or took loans from 3rd tier lenders, Could be possible. Or there is more to story than what is shown.
So what do you recommend for me at the moment?
MrNice, I can only guide you regarding the loan side of things. Regarding buying properties or which properties to buy. I am not the right person to ask.
Just call the bank and ask them to work out the numbers for you. You will know if you can borrow. If you want me to organise someone to call you and discuss. Happy to do that too. PM me your mobile number and state you are in.
Hi GuyfromMelbourne, thanks for this thread. I’m looking at refinancing.
Is there any disadvantage of asking two or more brokers to see what rate they can find for you? I was thinking maybe the banks might see multiple queries in your name, and wasn’t sure if that would have any downside.
And what do you think of cashback/trailing commission brokers such as Mates Rates?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Giraffe, I have been on the receiving end of customer jumping from 1 to another. So wouldn't recommend doing it to someone. If you don't like a broker then it probably it makes sense but if the broker is good and doing everything right then no point wasting your and their time.
With that said, a broker should not submit file to different banks and then tell you what you are getting. Broker is supposed to give you 3-5 best options based on their expertise and take your feedback before going ahead with submitting apps and doing credit hits, that drop your credit score.
Regarding comissions I don't understand your question. Please clarify a bit more.
Cash back mortgage brokers offer to refund their trailing commission to you. But I can’t find much information about these. I’m wondering what the catch is?
I haven't heard about brokers doing it. If you can quote an example, I can probably clarify.
@Giraffe: Wow…..I didn't know brokers were doing this… from what I can see. The broker is trying to attract more customers by letting the trail comission go their pocket.
So good for customer. I didn't see anything wrong in it apart from $10 fee per month.
I always get confused about the installment amount that i pay every week. how do banks calculate how much principle money and how much interest i need to pay every month. Do they have any table like eg say if i pay $300 a week, that is 200 principle and $100 interest make it $300.
How long this cycle goes ?? because many time interest rate stays same but when bank charge me interest for one month, one month is low and second month is high even my total loan amount is less then previous month but still they charge higher interest amount for that month. really confusing.
some one told me that bank tires to collect majority interest in first couple of years so even when you pay off your loan in say 10 years you still like paying interest for 20 years.
The interest repayments are confusing because it depends on number of days in a month. The least one is normally in March. Because feb(previous month) is 28 days. Also, depends on due date falling on a weekend. So 1 month you could be charged for 33 days and 1 month 28 days.
Regarding int and principal repayments. Best way to understand is by looking at an amortization schedule. You can try searching for one on google. Some websites provide it for free. That will explains how extra repayments work too.
This confuses so many people and it's so hard to explain because people just can't wrap their head around it. Your repayment is calculated ahead of time based on your current balance, interest rate and remaining loan term to determine how much you need to be paying each week/month to pay out the loan by its expiry. That calculated instalment doesn't change until a loan review is done. Even if your interest rate changes, if the bank doesn't do a loan review and another calculation, your repayments don't change because your repayments are calculated based on where your loan sits at the time of calculation.
The interest you see being charged onto your loan is calculated on a daily basis then tallied and added to your balance once a month. So that number you see being added onto your loan is largely unrelated to what you're paying as your repayments because the interest portion of your repayments are calculated over the entire loan term while the interest charge is calculated daily.
Say you have a 10 year loan for 100k. Based on current interest rates, it's calculated that over 10 years you will pay 140k worth of interest on top of your original 100k loan. So the bank then calculates that you need to pay 2k a month to pay back that 240k in 10 years. So of that 2k, 40% or 800 of it is principle and 60% or 1200 is interest. But you won't see 1200 being charged as interest every month because the interest getting charged is calculated daily. So it tends to be much higher towards the beginning of a loan when your balance is high and reduces at the end of the loan when you've paid off most of the balance and fluctuates month to month based on how many days there are in the month and where your balance sits each day.
One thing to consider, and something a lot of people don't realize or take advantage of, is if you pay your instalments early, you reduce your balance for the remainder of the month so you get charged less interest. So if your due date is on the 30th and interest is charged on the 30th and you make your monthly payment on the 1st, interest is being calculated based on a lower balance each day than if you made your payment on the 30th.
Thanks for the AMA OP.
Hypothetical question.
Home loan application of a person who
A. has 2 credit cards with a credit limit of say 30K but all monthly bills paid in full with no partial payments
B. exact same profile as A but without any credit cards at all - all transactions through debit card/cash
Is there any difference in how the bank rate these two cases?
Answer to your question is below too.
But keep in mind that CC limits bring down the borrowing capacity. So may need to be reduced before loan is fully approved.
Hi GuyfromMelb,
Thanks for AMA, adding to @OzDayZee's question.
C. Same profile as A but had car loan.
How would these 3 compare?
When I brought the car I was told having car loan history would help with home load where as credit card history doesn't really do much.
Please share your wisdom 😊
Having a credit(PL or CC) does make a difference because ANZ can lend upto 97% LVR. Bank is willing to take extra because they can see you have handled debt before. Also, in future credit ratings could become a big thing. The rates will depend on your credit score.
I have heard other banks have something similar too. Where they lend upto 97% LVR if you have had a debt and paid on time.
In small business having credit profile with bank helps too.
But that's all the scenarios I can think of.
Thanks for the info.
I was wondering if this is true as I didn't much mush info online.
One this I find it odd is my car load isn't shown on my credit file, not sure why but at least I can still get my CC application approved. 😆
Hi OP. Thanks for this thread. Just wondering if, as a Chartered Accountant, I would be eligible for a 90% LVR loan without LMI (assuming servicing wasn't an issue)?
Cheers!
Not with ANZ. Not sure about other banks though. This is where brokers have an edge 😊.
Thanks for the response mate!
Hi OP
If I have started a new job as a full time/permanent for last 5 months, would I need to give my tax details/payg for loan approval?
Salary slips should do. May be bank statements too.
I think westpac is doing 2k per property. Check it out.