From: Geoff Whitfield
Hi,
I'm looking at a property which I believe will be slightly cash flow positive while giving a chance of capital growth.
If I proceeded, I would be using up all my equity, and would have to pay out on mortgage insurance.
I've been reading some US material which suggests that in some circumstances, a vendor may agree to taking a loan for 10% deposit, and that loan to be taken care of by the purchaser. The vendor gets to sell the property at asking price (win), and the purchaser gets to avoid the mortgage insurance (win). And if the vendor were to take 20% mortgage instead of 10%, the purchaser would have equity still to buy somewhere else again (bigger win?).
Any thoughts on this? has it been done- or is it legal- here?
Hi,
I'm looking at a property which I believe will be slightly cash flow positive while giving a chance of capital growth.
If I proceeded, I would be using up all my equity, and would have to pay out on mortgage insurance.
I've been reading some US material which suggests that in some circumstances, a vendor may agree to taking a loan for 10% deposit, and that loan to be taken care of by the purchaser. The vendor gets to sell the property at asking price (win), and the purchaser gets to avoid the mortgage insurance (win). And if the vendor were to take 20% mortgage instead of 10%, the purchaser would have equity still to buy somewhere else again (bigger win?).
Any thoughts on this? has it been done- or is it legal- here?
Last edited by a moderator: