5.80% pa Variable Home Loan / Refinance for Essential Workers (New Loans Only, Min $100k Loan, 5.83% pa CR) @ G&C Mutual Bank

860

5.80% pa Variable Home Loan / Refinance for Essential Workers (New Loans Only, Min $100k Loan, 5.83% pa CR) @ G&C Mutual Bank

rcgy on 03/07/2024 - 10:59 gcmutual.bank (3399 clicks)
Last edited 03/07/2024 - 13:06 by 1 other user

Was shopping around and found this- looks to be pretty good value. 100% offset account, redraw available with a $30 fee, min $100 withdrawal. No establishment fees nor monthly fees, loan preparation fees are at cost.

Main catch is that you have to meet their criteria of essential worker; frontline ambulance officer, paramedic, firefighter, police officer, corrective services officer, nurse, aged care or disability worker, teacher, early childhood educator, defence or military personnel.

Up to 95% LVR
100% offset account
No establishment fee
No monthly fee
Up to $1000 towards third party costs
Unlimited redraws and extra repayments
Overtime and shift allowances may be assessed at 100% for eligible essential services

Financial Home Loan Loan Refinance

7 Aug 10:52am

Related Stores

G&C Mutual Bank

closed Comments

seanmilt on 03/07/2024 - 11:02

+3

I tried to jump over to these guys, as a registered occupational therapist, however in speaking to the customer service, they indicated I wouldn't be eligible.
- edumacation on 03/07/2024 - 11:08
  
  I was wondering if you had to be one of the specified occupations or could it be a different front line worker job in the hospital to count
  - skye89 on 03/07/2024 - 12:03
    
    +3
    
    I tried as a hospital pharmacist. Did not work.
- flywire on 09/07/2024 - 15:08
  
  Of course not, you beaut rates for essential workers… but your income is not high enough for the repayments… too bad but good brand promotion.
  - cheaptech20 on 18/07/2024 - 08:00
    
    Depends, have a friend who is a doctor at a hospital(essential) on 300k, qualified for a similar loan.
sickllama on 03/07/2024 - 11:07

+2

I use to be with G&C for my homeloan and found them really good to deal with. Would recommend.
vl0071 on 03/07/2024 - 11:07

Does anyone have any experience with this bank? i.e do they jack the interest rates up often compared to others?
- sickllama on 03/07/2024 - 11:12
  
  +6
  
  I was with them from late 2019 until Dec 2023. They didn't cut my rate quite as much as the official rate cuts (e.g. I would get 15 basis points instead of 25). During the rate rises they did exactly as per rba ( i.e. not any more).
  
  They did match a new customer only offer on a fixed rate split in Dec 2020 for me..
  - Binchicken22 on 03/07/2024 - 14:18
    
    +2
    
    It's funny how this is considered good hey lol
  - Kas on 12/07/2024 - 10:23
    
    15 basis points instead of 25, that is terrible…
- DrRalph on 03/07/2024 - 14:33
  
  +1
  
  Yep. This bank is terrible. Check their reviews: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/g-c-mutual-bank
- Orcky723 on 03/07/2024 - 21:16
  
  +2
  
  Not a customer but not for want of trying. We are FHB trying to get pre-approval for loan. Took weeks to respond, couldn’t answer questions, asked for extraneous info a broker doesn’t even ask for. I suppose if you can get over the wall of customer service to the golden egg on the other side, then go for it.
  
  But would not recommend.
juns on 03/07/2024 - 11:09

Wow, thanks OP! my wife is early childhood educator, I shall try to find out more about this!
- rcgy on 03/07/2024 - 11:28
  
  +1
  
  Glad to help! My wife's a teacher, so I'm thinking we might jump ship from MyState's 6.09%.
  - KingJuf on 03/07/2024 - 14:22
    
    My calculations of my loan only indicate about $500 savings a year as I am on 6.09 as well with ANZ ($10 offset), is it actually still worth it for you when you consider the discharge fees?
    - rcgy on 03/07/2024 - 14:59
      
      Discharge fee for MyState is ~$380, plus we only have redraw, no offset account. Guess it's a question of how much your time is worth!
      - KingJuf on 03/07/2024 - 15:38
        
        @rcgy: Yeh I think my state fees are around the same (WA) but unsure if ANZ have any additional fees on top of that.
Wiadro on 03/07/2024 - 11:09

good IR, i wish they had a list of Essential Workers which are available
- skye89 on 03/07/2024 - 12:04
  
  The list is as above. No way around it.
Gdsamp on 03/07/2024 - 11:13

+2
List from Target Market Determination
at least one borrower meets predefined essential worker criteria (essential worker defined as

frontline ambulance officer

frontline paramedic

frontline firefighter

frontline police officer

corrective services officer

nurse

aged care or disability worker

teacher

early childhood educator

defence or military personnel
- Wiadro on 03/07/2024 - 11:17
  
  +1
  
  should just be - All medical and allied health centers and hospital staff
  - pjetson on 03/07/2024 - 11:27
    
    And not police, firies, military?
    - Wiadro on 03/07/2024 - 11:29
      
      +2
      
      that too, but classifying a nurse that is not frontline to get this loan is discriminatory towards allied health workers who are frontline
      - xyron on 03/07/2024 - 11:37
        
        +10
        
        @Wiadro: This entire loan product is discriminatory, that is the point.
        
        Not that that is a problem per se, but whinging that it isn't discriminatory in the very particular way that suits you, is a bit tin-eared.
      - ONEMariachi on 03/07/2024 - 12:27
        
        @Wiadro: Yeah definitely weird. My wife works full time in a low ses school alongside teachers as a speechie but wouldn't qualify for this.
    - UNFKNBLVBL on 03/07/2024 - 11:49
      
      +3
      
      yeah "essential workers" is a bit provocative, it should just be "some essential workers" or "professions/roles that we feel like helping out"
      - 1st-Amendment on 03/07/2024 - 12:42
        
        -3
        
        @UNFKNBLVBL:
        
        yeah "essential workers" is a bit provocative
        
        This whole 'essential worker' thing is yet another virtue signalling scam that actually creates more problems than it solves, because who decides what 'essential' really is? eg I don't see farmers on the list, but without them everyone dies. They sound essential to me. What about doctors? The front-line paramedic gets a deal, but the back-line surgeon misses out? Aren't they equally 'essential'?
        
        We seem to be entering a new age where special privileges for some are now deemed acceptable again. After centuries of enlightenment thinking finally achieving equality under the law in the early 70's, that is all now all being thrown under the bus in favour of protected classes again. Are you Black? You get special treatment Are you a woman? special treatment. "Essential worker' special treatment. Alphabet soup? Special treatment.
        
        This will not end well.
        
        Flintz on 03/07/2024 - 13:47
        
        -1
        
        @1st-Amendment: Special treatment was always the case even in the old age, just behind closed doors. Come from an elite school? Special treatment. Come from a developing country? Lower pay. Know the big boss? Special treatment. It's just more diverse and out there nowadays, just saying
        
        1st-Amendment on 03/07/2024 - 15:09
        
        +1
        
        @Flintz:
        
        Special treatment was always the case even in the old age, just behind closed doors.
        
        Under the law it wasn't. That is an inportant distinction. Legalising discrimination can not possibly end well, it will only continue to sow resentment and further divide everyone.
        
        Flintz on 03/07/2024 - 19:45
        
        -1
        
        @1st-Amendment: The law can't really determine what goes behind closed doors. Officially you'll get a reason like "not a good fit" or "someone was a stronger candidate". You cant deny that discrimination is part of the reality of hiring and thinking otherwise is just using rose tinted glasses
        
        1st-Amendment on 03/07/2024 - 19:55
        
        @Flintz:
        
        Officially you'll get a reason like "not a good fit" or "someone was a stronger candidate".
        
        Or that could be true. What evidence do you have that says otherwise?
        For any job application there's one person who gets the job, and lots that don't. Some of those people move on, others cry foul. But without evidence it comes across as a weak excuse.
        
        You cant deny that discrimination is part of the reality
        
        It seems like we're talking about two different things here. My comment is entirely in respect to 'equality under the law'. If you have some grievance that you can prove then the law can help. That's why it's so important. But if the law no longer cares about such things, then it only gets worse for everyone, not better.
        
        If you think that causal discrimination is bad when it was illegal, just wait til you see the effects of legalising it again.
        
        Flintz on 03/07/2024 - 20:17
        
        -1
        
        @1st-Amendment: If you think I need evidence to say that job hiring has been discriminatory before then you're not in reality. I'm not even saying this as someone who cried foul, I've literally got job offers simply because of the school I went to and I've hired people also based on certain discriminatory factors.
        
        The law may say one thing, but it's really hard to prove in this case, and it's endemic in so many companies so to me it's not even worth the paper it's written on. You even said it yourself, it's now being casualised and even put in job ads even illegally and no one bats an eyelid. The whole point I was trying to say is that this is nothing new and is not a "growing" problem
        
        1st-Amendment on 03/07/2024 - 20:31
        
        @Flintz:
        
        If you think I need evidence
        
        I do, because that's how the world should work. Evidence based.
        What is your alternative, just believe anything anyone says at face value? That doesn't sound great…
        
        The whole point I was trying to say is that this is nothing new and is not a "growing" problem
        
        But it is new. Because until a few years ago this kind of thing was not legal. Now it is. That is new. And if you agree that discrimination is bad, then more of it must be worse than less of it.
        
        Ademos on 04/07/2024 - 01:27
        
        -1
        
        @1st-Amendment: Under the law, special treatment was codified in such things as the white australian policy.
        
        The good old days eh? Kind of slipping that mask a bit sport. It was only the good old days for one kind of bloke.
        
        1st-Amendment on 04/07/2024 - 09:10
        
        -1
        
        @Ademos:
        
        Under the law, special treatment was codified in such things as the white australian policy.
        
        That is true. Then what happened after that? I'll give you a hint, look at the civil rights movement in the late 60's and early 70's that granted full equality to all under the law.
        
        The good old days eh? Kind of slipping that mask a bit sport. It was only the good old days for one kind of bloke.
        
        Straw man. You'll have to do better than that kid…
        
        Ademos on 04/07/2024 - 14:11
        
        @1st-Amendment: You said until a few years ago discrimination was not legal. The exact opposite has been true for most of this countries history. You were wrong. Cope.
        
        1st-Amendment on 04/07/2024 - 14:26
        
        -1
        
        @Ademos:
        
        You said until a few years ago discrimination was not legal.
        
        That's right. When civil rights changes happened 50 years ago, open discrimination like this was not legal. So we had about 40 years of living the dream, now the woke ideology is sending us back to open discrimination again. That is not progress.
        
        The exact opposite has been true for most of this countries history
        
        Cool, so you made some assumptions and based you argument on that. ie A straw man exactly like I said,
        
        You were wrong. Cope.
        
        Straw man was wrong. Cope.
        
        Ademos on 04/07/2024 - 18:00
        
        @1st-Amendment: Same sex marriage was only recognised in 2017. How many more examples within that 50 year window would you like. Let's define your number up front, shall we?
        
        1st-Amendment on 05/07/2024 - 12:16
        
        -1
        
        @Ademos:
        
        Same sex marriage was only recognised in 2017
        
        Cool story… but off topic… again…
        
        How many more examples within that 50 year window would you like. Let's define your number up front, shall we?
        
        How about at least one that is relevant to the topic? Or more importantly, let's see if we can agree than less discrimination is better than more. Do you at least accept that? And if so, how does introducing more discrimination help achieve that aim?
        
        Ademos on 06/07/2024 - 02:20
        
        @1st-Amendment: Couldnt answer a simple question the moment you saw the writing on the wall.
        
        Good luck. Lol.
        
        1st-Amendment on 06/07/2024 - 08:38
        
        @Ademos:
        
        Couldnt answer a simple question
        
        I answered your question. Reading fail.
        
        I see you failed to answer mine though. The irony of this is delicious…
- Hikey on 03/07/2024 - 16:45
  
  I wonder whether these are only paid workers or whether volunteer firies, ambos and SES are eligible as well
- Caleb9295 on 04/07/2024 - 03:08
  
  As a Registered Nurse, their definitions of 'frontline' is discriminatory at best.
- Dirk36 on 07/07/2024 - 07:50
  
  I will remember this as a interstate truck driver ie I am not essential as we certainly were last time! Funny part is long distance highway drivers earn more then anyone on that list and definitely are the most essential!
rezok on 03/07/2024 - 11:38

+6

$30 redraw fee? That’s a bit archaic.
- rcgy on 03/07/2024 - 11:57
  
  +5
  
  Yeah, but there's an offset account, too. Mathematically, they're the exact same end result. Don't know why you'd want to go for the early repayments, as it's technically the bank's money.
- donman92 on 03/07/2024 - 12:08
  
  +9
  
  No need to worry about redraw fees when you have an offset account ..unless you're trying to pass the Centrelink assets test, as they will count the offset account, however they will not assess the amount available for redraw.
  - lknight on 03/07/2024 - 23:57
    
    can this be linked to a transaction account so I can pay for things while having an offset account?
dwhes on 03/07/2024 - 11:47

+1

Cheers op. Might look at moving to this. Decent saving over my current rate and less fees, even with the $30 redraw fee.
Brent8759 on 03/07/2024 - 12:00

+1

Just about to have my loan finalised with them they have been good to deal with, but they arent a low/easy document bank, i had to supply 3 months of my bank transactions to them which put me a little off but didnt affect my approval in the end
donman92 on 03/07/2024 - 12:03

"min $100k loan" - forgot it's not the 90s 🤣
..yes I know for refinancing an existing loan too
- 1st-Amendment on 03/07/2024 - 13:21
  
  +4
  
  Same reason Mortgage comparison rates are completely pointless. They're based on a $150k mortgage which almost no-one has.
  
  Can you imagine how many public servants were required to set up that scheme only for it to be obsolete on day 1. Your tax dollars at work!
  - Jugganautx on 03/07/2024 - 18:40
    
    -2
    
    Speak for yourself I bought in 2018 and I only have 50k left 🤦
    - 1st-Amendment on 03/07/2024 - 19:37
      
      Speak for yourself I bought in 2018 and I only have 50k left
      
      Which also is not $150k… so also pointless for you too…
  - greatlamp on 04/07/2024 - 01:21
    
    The 150k mortgage comparitor is ideal, it highlights the impacts of additional fees on the effective interest rate.
    
    A $500 fee will have a small impact on the total fees of a 150k loan, it will have a much smaller impact on a $1.5 million loan.
    
    Increasing the rate to match current mortgage sizes will only benefit the banks looking to minimise how high their fees appear.
    - 1st-Amendment on 09/07/2024 - 13:27
      
      The 150k mortgage comparitor is ideal, it highlights the impacts of additional fees on the effective interest rate.
      
      It doesn't. You own comment below shows that.
      
      A $500 fee will have a small impact on the total fees of a 150k loan, it will have a much smaller impact on a $1.5 million loan.
      
      So it doesn't show the true impact since almost all mortgages are much higher than $150k (average is over $600k).
      
      Increasing the rate to match current mortgage sizes will only benefit the banks
      
      No-one suggested that. Calling out waste is not an endorsement for more waste of a different kind. But if you are going to waste taxpayer dollars on pointless schemes it should at least be close to the average mortgage, not some fairy tale figure that is useless for almost all new lenders.
      - greatlamp on 09/07/2024 - 13:30
        
        @1st-Amendment: It's a comparison rate. For comparison between mortgages from different banks. The point is that both banks have to use the same basis for comparison. A smaller mortgage highlights the proportion of fees, particularly fixed fees.
        
        Do you appreciate these details?
        
        1st-Amendment on 09/07/2024 - 13:43
        
        @greatlamp:
        
        It's a comparison rate. For comparison between mortgages from different banks
        
        Sure but it's useless since it doesn't match anything any lender will see in reality. What point is comparing things that don't actually exist in real life?
        
        Do you appreciate these details?
        
        I sure do. Do you?
        
        Let me give an analogy to demonstrate. You want to buy a new Tesla, and the government uses your tax money to create a 'comparison rate' of fuel economy between Commodores and Falcons. It serves you no purpose at all since nothing in the comparison criteria matches anything in real life.That is how useless the mortgage comparison rate is for almost all new lenders.
        
        greatlamp on 09/07/2024 - 13:54
        
        @1st-Amendment: How about a closer analogy, the government requires the manufacturers of cars to test their vehicles in controlled conditions, a 'highway' scenario and a 'city' scenario, and report to consumers the fuel efficiency of the vehicle they are selling.
        
        Do you understand this has value, even if it doesn't not represent reality?
        
        Do you understand this cost the government nothing?
        
        Pull your head out and understand what the thing you are critical of actually is.
        
        1st-Amendment on 09/07/2024 - 18:51
        
        @greatlamp:
        
        the government requires the manufacturers of cars to test their vehicles in controlled conditions, a 'highway' scenario and a 'city' scenario, and report to consumers the fuel efficiency of the vehicle they are selling.
        
        That is not a good analogy because fuel economy does actually match reality for the most part. Unlike mortgage comparison rates which don't.
        
        Do you understand this has value, even if it doesn't not represent reality?
        
        If it doesn't match reality how can it have value? You may as well use numbers pulled out of your behind, they have equally useless value.
        
        Do you understand this cost the government nothing?
        
        You think APRA costs nothing to run? All the armies of taxpayer funded lawyers that created the policies work for free? Reality is not your thing is it…
        
        Pull your head out and understand what the thing you are critical of actually is.
        
        I thought I spelt this out quite clearly. Comparison rates are useless for almost all new lenders since almost no new loans bear any resemblance in anyway to the mortgage comparison criteria. The scheme cost taxpayers money and it offers no value.
        
        But don't just take my word for it, see here: https://www.mortgagebusiness.com.au/regulation/12006-regulat…
        
        Taxpayers paid ARPA to create the scheme, taxpayers paid ASIC to criticise the scheme, taxpayers pay the Productivity Commission to analyse the scheme, then taxpayers funded Ministers will request changes to the scheme, which will require APRA to re-write the tax scheme. All that is our money be burned for nothing of any use to anyone.
        
        greatlamp on 09/07/2024 - 19:16
        
        @1st-Amendment:
        
        If it doesn't match reality how can it have value?
        
        I can't help you. You seem intellectually incapable of understanding what a comparison is, or I am being trolled.
        
        1st-Amendment on 10/07/2024 - 15:58
        
        @greatlamp:
        
        I can't help you
        
        I'm the one trying to help you.
        
        You seem intellectually incapable of understanding what a comparison is
        
        Comparing things that do not match reality have no use in reality. You are the one failing to grasp such a simple concept
lily99 on 03/07/2024 - 12:14

+9

No doctors? Do hospitals only need nurses?😅
- Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 03/07/2024 - 12:26
  
  -2
  
  What's the minimum remuneration for a doc that's finished their post grad requirements?
  
  How does that compare to all the front line roles included in the offer?
  
  Might find your answer there.
  - oldmate78 on 03/07/2024 - 12:59
    
    +3
    
    Interestingly from 2026, the same as nurses
    
    https://www.reddit.com/r/ausjdocs/comments/1ds1i0x/grad_nurs…
    - rickyricardo6 on 03/07/2024 - 13:17
      
      +1
      
      In addition to this, there is a sign on bonus of $5000 and scholarship up to $16500 for those graduating/studying 2023/2024 for nursing and midwifery
    - Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 03/07/2024 - 14:46
      
      -7
      
      Being Reddit, of course that post is incorrect. You can google the EBAs for VHIA and see that intern/PG docs doing jack all get $60+ an hour from day 1, with additional allowances usually applying.
      
      Plus it ignores the fact that nurses wages plateau nearly immediately after 2+ years.
      - oldmate78 on 03/07/2024 - 18:30
        
        +4
        
        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: What do you have against intern doctors? Bit harsh to say they do jack all for $60ph.
        
        Also can’t find any EBA where they earn this.
        
        Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 05/07/2024 - 21:59
        
        -1
        
        @oldmate78: What do they earn in the VHIA EBA that I specifically referenced then? If you disagree?
        
        oldmate78 on 06/07/2024 - 00:07
        
        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: Page 131
        
        $1598.53 per week, so $42.06 per hour.
        
        I don't have a horse in this race, and I've actually referenced 2 links, and you have referenced nothing my friend.
      - gamemaster on 03/07/2024 - 19:47
        
        +5
        
        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: As someone who knows the system I can assure you your claim that interns and PGY doctors are doing “jack all” is absolutely incorrect. The junior doctors and doctors in training are the doctors you usually see when you are in hospital. They do the night shifts, they do the weekend and public holidays. They work long stressful hours and spend further time studying outside of work. They need to pay for training and exams which costs thousands of dollars. It’s a difficult career which see many doctors burn out.
      - flashi007 on 03/07/2024 - 20:56
        
        +6
        
        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: You have no idea how the hospital system works with that comment. The interns and PGY2-3 docs are the ones that do most of the legwork around the hospitals.
      - clem on 04/07/2024 - 19:54
        
        +3
        
        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: What an absolutely asinine comment. You deserve to get blasted - obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Big words probably written from behind a cushy computer setup, during the day in your corporate job browsing OzBargain doing "jack all".
        
        Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 05/07/2024 - 21:58
        
        -5
        
        @clem: So everyone is butt hurt over my flippant "jack all" comment.
        
        Any comments on the pay rate? Yeah nup, because I'm correct.
  - flashi007 on 03/07/2024 - 13:04
    
    +2
    
    Here are the base pay rates for each state:
    
    QSL: 90,141
    
    NT: 87,524
    
    TAS: 87,000
    
    WA: 83,609
    
    VIC: 83,124
    
    SA: 81,814
    
    ACT: 77,898
    
    NSW: 76,009
    
    They may get more with overtime. Doctors don't make bank until they are consultants - which can take years and years of post graduate study.
    - Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 03/07/2024 - 14:44
      
      -2
      
      Looks like intern rates. You know what my post was getting at. They don't want 5+ yo post grad doctors obtaining these deals.
      - flashi007 on 03/07/2024 - 20:54
        
        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: Of course. I agree with you. These are the intern rates for each state. I should’ve been clearer in my post.
    - 1st-Amendment on 09/07/2024 - 13:29
      
      QSL
      
      What? Is that the gay name for QLD?
      - flashi007 on 09/07/2024 - 23:46
        
        @1st-Amendment: it was copied and pasted from another website
- ilubbargains on 03/07/2024 - 12:28
  
  +1
  
  "Essential worker on mediocre salary" would've landed them in hot water
vickyrare on 03/07/2024 - 12:37

+5

After working hard for 19 years, finally both a house in VIC on cash. Moving to the new place on Friday night.

I am muslim and we are not allowed to give / take interest.

Goodluck to all.
- zorodluffy on 03/07/2024 - 13:20
  
  +6
  
  dam dude, if you werent muslim you would of been able to get a loan for the same house along time ago and had the equity from growth
  - GoIdDigger on 03/07/2024 - 15:12
    
    Something something haram
- rvsure on 03/07/2024 - 13:22
  
  +1
  
  I would like to refinance my mortgage to an interest only payment loan from you. I am happy to pay whatever interest rate you are willing to offer 😃
- Binchicken22 on 03/07/2024 - 14:19
  
  Don't they have Muslim banks that do round about ways of getting around this religious "law"?… Like you don't pay interest but you've gotta mow their lawn every week or something?
  - BeauKilla on 03/07/2024 - 16:04
    
    The people at the top don't obey the rules, it's to keep everyone else below under a tight leash
- Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 03/07/2024 - 14:51
  
  Riba. Not allowed to pay interest on a mortgage, but allowed to rent and let someone else pay interest on their mortgage, or have an entity buy the house and "rent to buy" it to you at exorbitant mark up. Doesn't sound very fair.
- Jigram on 03/07/2024 - 21:12
  
  +2
  
  Ignore the stupid comments - congratulations to you and your family.
- greatlamp on 04/07/2024 - 01:35
  
  In the middle east banks offer loans with fixed interest rates for the entire term. The borrower is given a contract with the amount of the repayment, the interest rate is incorporated and not explicitly stated.
  
  The reason Muslims aren't allowed to take on interest is to protect poor/illiterate people from being taken advantage of, essentially enslaved, by loans that can never be repaid as the interest rate conveniently changes any time the lender feels like it.
  
  Aren't there any banks in Australia that would offer you a loan that meets the needs of Muslims? Our economic system is based on debt, your currency loses value every year.
  
  If you are reading the laws meant to protect you and instead interpreting them in a way that harms you, then surely you are not interpreting them correctly? Did you save your money buy buying gold?
- EyyBanane on 04/07/2024 - 07:04
  
  I am curious. Where do you save the cash - In an everyday account? How did the inflation work for you? Di you invest in gold or anything else?
- juns on 04/07/2024 - 09:12
  
  Even though I am not muslim, I was born in the one of the biggest muslim country. I have to admit that I am very surprised to read about that from you.
  
  Guess that just proves my ignorance..
woodsy175 on 03/07/2024 - 12:52

I know it says no monthly fee but is there an annual fee seeing as there’s an offset with the loan? Thanks
- codyy on 03/07/2024 - 20:49
  
  +1
  
  No annual fee
  No monthly fee
  No establishment fee
Doofie69er on 03/07/2024 - 12:56

this is very cheap! Can it be joint application as my wife is a nurse?
- Kevinzoid on 03/07/2024 - 12:58
  
  +2
  
  1 Eligibility criteria, terms and conditions and fees and charges apply. Available when at least one borrower meets essential worker criteria as a frontline ambulance officer, paramedic, firefighter, police officer, corrective services officer, nurse, aged care or disability worker, teacher, early childhood educator, defence or military personnel. For new security or new refinance applications only. Not available for existing G&C Mutual Bank Loans.
  - KingJuf on 03/07/2024 - 13:54
    
    It does not mention it there but I wonder if both names need to be on the title, I purchased my property and also refinanced previously all on my own as my partner was not working. Now is an educator I wonder If I would need to add her to title to be eligible or if it would be sufficient if she was seen as a 'borrower' on a joint home loan application.
    - Kevinzoid on 03/07/2024 - 15:53
      
      Let me know if you find out! I'm in a similar position and will be applying today and asking over email. Will get back to you if I get a response first
      - KingJuf on 03/07/2024 - 16:04
        
        @Kevinzoid: Thankyou, I am still weighing in whether the .29 rate drop is worth the refinance cost and trouble. Let me know anyway!
        
        Kevinzoid on 09/07/2024 - 15:10
        
        +1
        
        @KingJuf: Hi KingJuf and all,
        I can confirm that "You can opt to have the title in one name & mortgage held jointly." per the response in the email I sent.
        
        KingJuf on 09/07/2024 - 15:17
        
        @Kevinzoid: thankyou for the confirmation! might consider this!

This was posted 5 months 18 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

5.80% pa Variable Home Loan / Refinance for Essential Workers (New Loans Only, Min $100k Loan, 5.83% pa CR) @ G&C Mutual Bank

Related Stores

closed Comments

Top Deals

New Deals