2 Loans for 1 property......

Don't know if technique is very common, as rare or general knowledge........

As LMI kicks in at 80% and above,

is this possible, are you able to borrow 80% from one lender, and then using another property as equity to get the 20%......

will the 20% LMI still apply, are there any drawbacks or traps in using 2 loans.......... or even using parents property for the extra 20%?????

feedback appreciated!
 
Hiya AK

if you keep the 2 properties and loans separate then usually no lmi is payable.

Not uncommon to be able to use a parents place for equity.........just make sure u know what u are getting them into.

ta
rolf
 
cool just wanted to be 100%... just another question

I was asked this by my parents, "why can't you obtain the 2nd loan yourself?""

assume I can borrow $300k based on current income, if I purchase a $300k property and finanace 100%, then I have to pay the LMI,

can I approach 2 different lenders (without lying or being shifty or anything, all legit), and borrow $150k x 2, to avoid the LMI.....

Are there any traps associated with this... just seems so easy...
 
ideally lenders want a first mortgage so its slightly conflicting. generally banks want first bite if you go bad so if you have 2 lenders securing 1 property who gets their bit first.?
(not that you will by any means)
 
Looks like some clarity is needed.

What you're suggesting is simply an 80% loan, with the 20% extra coming from another separate property (correct?).

So all you're doing is either borrowing a LOC against one property to pay for the 20%. Or, giving the bank the other property as security for the new one (not recommended generally).

This is standard stuff.
 
Hi Akumaslair,

Your last post is a little unclear. Are you referring to $300k being borrowed against the same property through two different lenders or with two properties as security? If there are two properties with sufficient equity then yes you could borrow $150k against one property and then put this down as a deposit on another property borrowing the rest from a different lender. Of course you wouldn't be able to borrow $150k from two different lenders with only 1 security property.

Kind Regards,

Cameron Perry
Perry Financial Strategies
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yes, I think I am confusing myself as well........

ok, I will try be as clear as possible....

I can borrow approx $300k based on my income. however LMI kicks in at 80%. which is not cheap.

so am I able to borrow 80%=$240k , and then obtain the remaining 20% through another lender if possible, OR 20% from my parents PPOR as equity.....

just wondering what the pros/cons, or any traps that I need to be aware of.
 
If there is only one property involved then no you will not be able to get one loan for 80% and another loan from a different lender for 20%. No second lender will take on that risk.

If there are 2 properties involved then yes you can get 20% on one and 80% on the other. Whether kids should borrow against their parents PPOR is another matter.
 
If you borrow the 20% from your parents, and you default on the loan, your parents can lose their money. If it's secured by your parents PPOR that's even worse because they might lose their house.

Before you say that 'I wouldn't do that to my parents' I note that no one ever INTENDS to default. But things happen, and if it hits the fan wouldn't you rather just you go down than drag your parents with you?

As for borrowing the extra 20% from a second bank, they would have to do it as a second mortgage (because the first bank has the first mortgage). Not as easy.

How about saving a deposit instead?
Alex
 
105% financing - 90% LVR + 15% personal debt

Hi Akumaslair,

I'm surprised no one has suggested using personal debt to make the difference and borrowing 105%, with your deposit held as a 'reserve' buffer in case anything go wrong (eg, you lose your job) and to make sure you can 'sleep easy' at night.

My business, Omega Investments purchased a $360k property in Roxby Downs in September 105% finance - no money down. Here is how it was done:

$324k mortgage secured loan (90% LVR, interest only 5yrs, 8.7%, no LMI)
$45k Fundcorp (subsidiary of Macquarie Bank - 13.5% P&I 7yrs, secured by cavet on property)
$15k major bank unsecured loan (12% P&I 7 yrs)

$360k used to purchase property, $24k used for closing costs (eg, stamp duty etc)

You need a long (at least 60 days, preferrably 90 days) settlement to get this type of deal done, as it can be time consuming and an effort to get it over the line.

Step 1: Fundcorp $45k (secured by cavet)
You firstly apply (through your broker) to Fundcorp for their home loan secured product, which is a personal loan secured not by a 2nd mortgage but by cavet on the property you are buying. A cavet is a notice given to the Land Titles Office requesting that a restriction be placed on your property. (This is automatic and you will need to contest the cavet to have it removed)

Fundcorp will assess you for the loan and provided you can service a $300k loan with a little bit of spare capacity, you should be approved. A maximum of $45k (per property) can be approved. AFTER you buy the property and the mortgage is lodged, Fundcorp will lodge their cavet which prevents you from refinancing your mortgage or drawing any equity out until you have paid out Fundcorp (eg, you could roll Fundcorp's loan into the mortgage as your equity grows).

Step 2: Unsecured bank loan
You then apply for an unsecured personal loan of say $15k. You may need to state what the purpose of the loan is. You can say that you will use it to consolidate existing debt. To do this, you need to have credit card limits of $15k. Withdraw $15k on your credit cards, get the loan approved and cheques made out to repay the credit cards. Immediate pay down the credit cards with the $15k. You will then have a $15k debt (c12%) and no (additional) credit card debt (c18%). Alternatively, just get a St George credit card at 10% (though you mightn't get the $15k limit immediately).

So, now you have $60k in funds for a property purchase ($15k in the bank and $45k from Fundcorp that will be transferred to your solicitor's trust account - you can't directly access this $45k).

Step 3: 80-85% Loan to Value loan
In your case, apply for an 80% LVR loan (eg, $240k). You will still need to pay for the c5% closing costs, so I'd recommend borrowing at 85% and using the remaining funds from the $60k to pay for closing costs. There will be a small LMI charge, which (as in my above case) you can 'add' to the interest rate and not have to pay up front.

So there you have it - your $300k property is 105% financed. The interest rate will be higher than the usual 7.6% deal BUT you didn't need to put any money in. Don't spend your deposit - put it in a separate account and use it (only) when needed to make up any short fall. Assuming you have a 10% deposit on your $300k, your $30k is equivalent to 3yrs short fall of $830 a month in repayments - a huge buffer that let you sleep even though you've borrowed everything, no money down :)

All the best,

Flynn

[email protected]
 
Hi Flynn,

Welcome to the forum! However, based on your post - I think it's VERY CLEAR why no one suggested 105% finance........!!:eek:

Cheers,
Jen
 
Hi Flynn,

Thanks for your long post, great approach, one that I wasn't aware of.

just a few clarifications please.

in step one you have over 80% finance with no LMI, is this correct??

- step 2-3 I am finding it a bit hard undertand what the extra benefits are to using much higher interest loans......... I would prefer to use my parents property as equity, or do you see any drawbacks on this..... I would only be using the 20% for the parents property, so it won't be a huge amount of $$$.......

Am I making sense....
 
Hi Flynn,

Thanks for your long post, great approach, one that I wasn't aware of.

just a few clarifications please.

in step one you have over 80% finance with no LMI, is this correct??

- step 2-3 I am finding it a bit hard undertand what the extra benefits are to using much higher interest loans......... I would prefer to use my parents property as equity, or do you see any drawbacks on this..... I would only be using the 20% for the parents property, so it won't be a huge amount of $$$.......

Am I making sense....

Hi Akumaslair,

The approach Flynn is suggesting is crazy (I think) - rather than a once off $3-4k LMI fee - you'll be paying twice that each year in the increased interest rate alone!!

LMI fees are reasonable up to 90-95% for the excess funds you are receiving - over that % (as you head towards 100-105%), they increase substantially for a very small amount of funds - it's better to put that 5-10% in yourself.

I would advise, for many many reasons - DO NOT use your parents house against this loan. For a simple reason that the tax deductions will be difficult and possibly not deductible, (unless they are on the title of the IP as well). Also, you've advised that your goal is to aquire multiple properties - if you can't learn how to do it yourself from the start, and you want to move fast, you won't learn or be able to do it again if you can't do it on your own to start with. If you're using the equity in your parents place to buy you're own first home, might be a different story.......but starting on an investment - I advise not to.........if things go wrong - your parents could lose their house!! Think about that, once, twice, again.....your parents could lose their house! :eek:

Cheers,
Jen
 
Hi Jen,

yes, I totally agree with you, the advice I have seen from your other posts is always sensible and logical, I only intend to use the parents property as a last resort, eg I find the deal of a lifetime.....

and I agree, if you can't afford it within your own power, then it wasn't meant to be.... I do have the $$$ for the deposit or 10% , but wanting to keep it for backup or to buy another one!!!!!!!

akumaslair
 
Deposit vs higher interest/borrowings

Hi Jen and Akumaslair,

I agree with what Jen say - don't risk your parents house. If the worst happens, you (only) go bankrupt. You can recover from that. A situation with your parents forced to sell their home is a terrible outcome, emotionally and financially for them. This said, there is another option - National Australia Bank's 'Family Guarantee'.

The family guarantee involves immediate family 'guaranteeing' the deposit ONLY not going as guarantors on the entire mortgage. This means, worst case they lose the 20% deposit. If they don't have the money, then they can take out a reverse mortgage. However, it would be best that they have say 40% equity so they could pay out the deposit and not have to sell the house.

Deposit vs higher interest
Jen's suggestion is that you use a deposit rather than higher borrowing costs. Putting aside your option (parent's guarantee), let look at the benefits of both:

Deposit
You don't have to pay the LMI or risk fee (say 2%). This means you save $6000. You also don't have to pay say 1% higher interest (say $3000 a year). So over five years you save $21000.

Higher rate
You capitalise the LIM or risk fee, so you don't use your own funds and your mortgage is $6k more. However, think about it. Would you buy the same property for $306k vs $300k? Would you actually say no, I'm walking away? If you have done your research, $6k is not a deal breaker for a property. What is the difference between paying $306k or $300k plus $6k in extra costs?

Most people have no real idea (ie, don't get an independent, paid valuer to value their property) of the value of their property and $6k or even $10k can easily swing either way between the buyer and seller (especially a motivated one).

You do have an extra $3000 a year (assuming interest only) to pay. But wait, you didn't put $30000 in as a deposit. Use $15k of this to pay your 'extra' interest for five years. In fact, you could even (assuming you have serviceability) buy a second property and use the other $15k to service that property's extra interest.

Yes, you have to pay more interest but that is what you'd use your deposit for.


Now assume the property went up 5% a year for five years. It would be worth $383k - a capital gain of c$66k or $60k (after closing costs). In the two above scenarios you have made:

1. $66k on the $30000 invested or about 100% return on your cash (your cash-on-cash return)

vs

2. $60k on $15k (the extra interest over 5 yrs) or about 300% return on your cash

Note the monthly cash flow position of each is exactly the same. The 'extra' interest comes out of the saved deposit, so you don't have to chip in more. There will be extra prinicipal repayments (as Fundcorp and bank loan will be prinicipal and interest) though, so your return is less:

2b. $75k ($60k plus equity increase from $3k principal repayment each year) on $30k = 150% return.


Hope the above makes what I've done in my own investing a little clearer. It is more out on the risk curve and more risk usually means more return. It is also harder to get all the loan approvals (that why I said it needs a longer settlement period).

However, I've just done this exact deal structure in Roxby Downs (600km North of Adelaide) and my property has gone up $40k in less than 6 months.

I've put no money in to buy it and have only paid $2k in repayments so far, a net return of $20k ($40k - c$20k closing costs) on my $2k = 900% return

Have a think about it - I'm a big fan of borrowing as much as you can and using any deposit saved as your buffer for any periods of vacancy or 'unexpected' cashflow events (eg, car breaks down) that would otherwise cause you grief if you had put all your deposit into the loan (as it is unlikely you could draw this equity back out).

All the best, Flynn
 
Have a think about it - I'm a big fan of borrowing as much as you can and using any deposit saved as your buffer for any periods of vacancy or 'unexpected' cashflow events (eg, car breaks down) that would otherwise cause you grief if you had put all your deposit into the loan (as it is unlikely you could draw this equity back out).

All the best, Flynn

Flynn, how long have you been investing, and were you around for the last bust?
Alex
 
New to investing

Flynn, how long have you been investing, and were you around for the last bust?
Alex

Hi Alex,

I bought my first investment property this year and am buying a second one now (Gladstone QLD - also 105% financed). Wasn't around in the bust in the '90s (if that is what you are referring to).

Be interested in your views on what I'm doing, as you're obviously been in the game a lot longer than I have :)

Thanks, Flynn
 
Investing in boom towns

Flynn, how long have you been investing, and were you around for the last bust?
Alex

Hi Alex,

(following on my earlier reply) I'm investing in mining boom towns (eg, Roxby Downs and Gladstone) and both properties have 12 month contracts on them. Roxby has the planned $5bn expansion and 0% vacancy and Gladstone has the $2.2bn Rio expansion and $3bn Pacific plant and maybe Santos' $3.5bn LNG plant, with a decreasing vacancy rate.

Leveraging right out on the risk curve but have done due diligence (and visited) on both towns, so I'm confident there is limited downside risk to my investments and very little risk of downwards movement on the rents that would cause a cashflow crunch for me.

Flynn
 
Back
Top