Does this sound like a reasonable deal?
Scenario: the loan on an apartment as an IP was borrowed against the equity in our home.
Wife finds a broker who says that there is a risk of losing the home if we (for some unforeseen reason in the future) cannot pay off the interest on the IP, ie. the bank can chose to take ownership of either the apartment or the home.
Broker says he can restructure the loan so that only $60 000 of the equity in the home is used, rather than the whole lot. The broker gets commission from the bank, nothing else changes, ie no change in ongoing fees or interest payments. In short no change in the loan product or the withdraw capacity.
This sounds like a good deal, the bank never told us of this kind of scenario (why would they?) but is there anything we are missing that might catch us out later?
Would love to hear your thoughts/experiences with this kind of thing. Hope I've explained it enough to make sense.
Scenario: the loan on an apartment as an IP was borrowed against the equity in our home.
Wife finds a broker who says that there is a risk of losing the home if we (for some unforeseen reason in the future) cannot pay off the interest on the IP, ie. the bank can chose to take ownership of either the apartment or the home.
Broker says he can restructure the loan so that only $60 000 of the equity in the home is used, rather than the whole lot. The broker gets commission from the bank, nothing else changes, ie no change in ongoing fees or interest payments. In short no change in the loan product or the withdraw capacity.
This sounds like a good deal, the bank never told us of this kind of scenario (why would they?) but is there anything we are missing that might catch us out later?
Would love to hear your thoughts/experiences with this kind of thing. Hope I've explained it enough to make sense.