Hi JASA,
I didn't say your portfolio sucked. I said the cashflow position of your portfolio sux.
This is what they are all banging on about nowadays. Valuations and security and all that good stuff need to be tucked away nicely, no change there over the years. What has changed is their voracious appetite for income coverage as compared with the loan expense.
Looking at your cashflows.....assuming an interest rate of 7.5% pa over your 4 loans totalling 836K, that comes to 63K pa.
Looking at your gross rents, that comes to 82K pa.
Assuming 20% for all other costs (CR / WR / LT / Ins / Maint / PM fees) then your nett rent to service your loans equals 0.8 * 82K = 65K pa.
Yes, it appears that your portfolio is neutral from a cashflow perspective.
So, the only extra fat the Bank can chew on is your salary, most of which would be taken up with tax and supporting yourself......I can see why they have called it a day with you.
Could I suggest that if you wish to continue borrowing, perhaps look at properties that yield better than your Prop 1. At a gross yield of 4.3%, and a nett yield of probably 3.5%, it ain't exactly setting the world on fire....especially in the eyes of the Credit boys.
Once again, to be clear, I never said your portfolio sucked. But obviously in the eyes of the Credit boys, the cashflow of the portfolio does suck.