How many banks do you use for your property loans?

How many banks do you use for your property loans

  • 1

    Votes: 37 36.3%
  • 2

    Votes: 34 33.3%
  • 3

    Votes: 8 7.8%
  • 4

    Votes: 13 12.7%
  • 5

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • 6

    Votes: 3 2.9%
  • 7

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 8

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • 9

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 10+

    Votes: 4 3.9%

  • Total voters
    102
  • Poll closed .
Hi there,

Just wondering how many banks people use for all of their property loans?

I'm particularly interested in hearing from those who have all their lending with one bank (with a few loans, not just one!), and any positive or negative experiences from this...

Thanks.
 
Initially, I had a great run with one bank. It's all good. Until it isn't. Bit like when the party is over and the cops roll up and all the lights go on. Very sudden and no pre warning.
I've spent the past 15 months moving my loans to other banks. I now have 3 with Homeside (NAB), 2 with ING (about to re-fi them again with Homeloans Ltd), 1 with Homeloans Ltd and one with Westpac (who I'll be re-financing away from as soon as I possibly can).
Without that diversification, I'd not have been able to buy my most recent property and I'd not have been able to release the equity I have of the past year and a half.
The only positive in being with one bank initially is that it was easy to get funding for each purchase. They already had all the paperwork, so I only ever needed to produce the most recent loan statements and payslips.
I now advise and strongly favour diversification at the outset. There is little to gain from keeping it all in one shop.
Some folks get very excited about the piddly little discounts they get by having mulitple facilitied with one lender. These pale into insignificance, though, when you can't release equity or they give you shoddy valuations when they do let you. Best to look at the big picture, not just the tiny discount they suck you in with.
 
I used to have three, but at the moment only two. I have most of my lending with WeSuck. This is simply because I also have a family trust which, according to my trusty broker, most of the other lending institutions look at, whereas WeSuck don't. Apparently I'm too rent reliant for other banks ATM. :(
 
Most of my lendings also with W/Pac but refinancing at least 1 loan away from them as we speak (or type).

Like Rob said, all good with 1 lender but only for so long. Once you have reached their 'barrier', you soon get the cold shoulder. That's probably the same with most banks though I assume.

Regards
Marty
 
Last edited:
Gotta go wif da flow.
You go wherever is convenient when it's convenient when you have the choice.
Sometimes there's no choice, so you have to be patient and hammer it out for a while.
Sounds nice to be with only one, but not practical imo.
It's good to have a nice chunk that you can move around, and keep a few dangling carrots.
I think atm its nab, wbc, anz, suncorp. sometimes i forget some. :confused:
I like to shop'em, because my loans are a product that I sell imo.
Sometimes there are many bids, others times few.
 
Whoever wants to lend me money I will borrow from.

I use to use stg, however now days have heaps cba stg boq anz bkw + other lenders.

I wouldnt reccomend as others have said using one bank as this will get you unstuck when the turn the lights on.
 
I agree with the above comments but don't actually abide by them personally. I have 4 loans and all are with NAB. I've found it good so far as the bank manager knows my finances well.

They approved lending when I had $200K worth of credit cards just on the promise I would cancel a few of them. I thought it was quite good of them to operate in good faith like that.

When work slows down and there's time to buy the next two I will probably look at another lender all the same. Moreso due to the warnings of others here than any personal bad experiences.
 
We have everything with Westpac, and I am more than happy with that.

We are not "growing our portfolio" though and possibly would hit that "no more borrowing for you" wall if we tried to.

Perhaps it depends on where you are in your investing journey as to which bank is best :)/
 
cba, nab, anz, westpac, bw, st george, rgh, pepper, rams, homeside,macquarie, homeloans ltd, rates vary between 6.37% and 10.5%.
 
Some folks get very excited about the piddly little discounts they get by having mulitple facilitied with one lender. These pale into insignificance, though, when you can't release equity or they give you shoddy valuations when they do let you. Best to look at the big picture, not just the tiny discount they suck you in with.

brilliant advice, shame people often learn this way too late!
 
I'm particularly interested in hearing from those who have all their lending with one bank (with a few loans, not just one!), and any positive or negative experiences from this...
A mate of mine has had all his borrowings with one big 4 lender for 10 yrs or so. He's borrowed a few $M secured by a few IP, a PPOR & one comm prop. He always pays interest on time, has good servicability & has a fantastic relationship with his local branch manager. However, a couple of months ago the risk guys in the back room pulled the plug - out of the blue, he was told to reduce his LVR by an unspecified amount within 90 days.

The local branch manager is v. sympathetic, but helpless. Today it looks likely that he'll lose everything in fire sales within a month.

X-coll is a risk that is likely to be fatal in the bad times.
 
A mate of mine has had all his borrowings with one big 4 lender for 10 yrs or so. He's borrowed a few $M secured by a few IP, a PPOR & one comm prop. He always pays interest on time, has good servicability & has a fantastic relationship with his local branch manager. However, a couple of months ago the risk guys in the back room pulled the plug - out of the blue, he was told to reduce his LVR by an unspecified amount within 90 days.

Time to give TT or ACA a call. Or Koshie.
 
A mate of mine has had all his borrowings with one big 4 lender for 10 yrs or so. He's borrowed a few $M secured by a few IP, a PPOR & one comm prop. He always pays interest on time, has good servicability & has a fantastic relationship with his local branch manager. However, a couple of months ago the risk guys in the back room pulled the plug - out of the blue, he was told to reduce his LVR by an unspecified amount within 90 days.

The local branch manager is v. sympathetic, but helpless. Today it looks likely that he'll lose everything in fire sales within a month.

X-coll is a risk that is likely to be fatal in the bad times.

What about the situation of having several loans with one lender, but not formally X-colled?

ie. each property loan is still secured by one property.
 
Only one bank per each IP


Ain't that kind of limiting ??


I've found one Bank to be rather good. I was, and still are to some extent, crossed up the wazoo with the one big Bank. It was a very very long time before - as Rob so eloquently put it - the cops came and switched the lights on. Up until then, there was some marvellous debauchery and goings on to be had....enough to set oneself up for life.


The lights on partying stopping business wasn't too bad in hindsight. You've gotta deal with the backroom credit guys from a distance, and yes, despite them being squirrels, they are looking after their shareholders funds so I can see where they are coming from. All worked out OK in the end without any sales. Cashflow saves the day, it's their language as well.


We must remember folks, what we do, buying multiple houses etc all the time is very abnormal.....it's not surprising that we don't fit into most of the pre-conceived ideas and boxes they make for the general population.


If I had to recommend a path, it'd be X-coll all the way. Get as big as you can as fast as you can before the cops arrive and the spotlights get turned on. By that, I mean use your equity as deposits for other titles. Sort out the entanglement later, there have been plenty of options presented to me to satisfy their criteria. Fire sale of the whole portfolio is just not warranted or requested in most prudent areas of investing. Chuck in a few dodgy developments gone wrong, a few cash draining landbank holdings, and empty comm. property or two.....and sure, I could see where a Bank demanding it be flogged off.


Anyone thinking of getting serious just doesn't get how hard it is to come up with - in my case - 30% plus costs in cash before going again. That could take 20 years of working or more to scrape together. Pffft to that.
 
If I had to recommend a path, it'd be X-coll all the way. Get as big as you can as fast as you can before the cops arrive and the spotlights get turned on. By that, I mean use your equity as deposits for other titles. Sort out the entanglement later

Did a broker somewhere just keel over?
 
What about the situation of having several loans with one lender, but not formally X-colled?

ie. each property loan is still secured by one property.

The problem is JIT is that mortgage documents have an all monies clause that means when you sell one property they equity must be repaid to the lender if requested.

A broker could qualify this though if I have the wrong terminology.
 
Did a broker somewhere just keel over?

yes i think so thats why they have not responded yet, still lying on the floor!

one per bank is not limiting because u can borrow back against that property and take that $$$ as deposit with next bank for next property, no need to X.

I have already stalked u today with an old post Dazz so i wont put up some of ur old posts when u hit that x-coll wall, u were not a happy chappy!
 
The problem is JIT is that mortgage documents have an all monies clause that means when you sell one property they equity must be repaid to the lender if requested.

A broker could qualify this though if I have the wrong terminology.

Nathan,

Yes, I am aware of the ''all monies clause'', but I think that there is still a difference between having all loans with one lender not x-coll vs. having all loans with one lender and x-coll.

The next question then is in what situations has this ''all monies clause'' been enforced?

It may be possible, but when is it likely?

I see lending as continuum:

(1) 1 RIP, 1 Bank
(2) >1 RIP, > 1Bank
(3) >1 RIP, 1 Bank, no x-coll
(4) >1 RIP, 1 Bank, no x-coll, some loans assessed on a ''portfolio basis''
(5) >1 RIP, 1 Bank, no x-coll, all loans assessed on a ''portfolio basis''
(6) >1 RIP, 1 Bank, partial x-coll - some RIP loans x-colled together, but not all
(7) >1 RIP, 1 Bank, full x-coll - all RIP loans x-colled together
(8) >1 RIP, 1 Bank, full x-coll, with one big loan for all RIPs - ''portfolio lending''

The aim being to maximise your leverage and size, at minimum interest cost, as fast as you possibly can, as Dazz mentions.
 
Last edited:
Top