Regarding the point about the house for 2 people, I agree. It is not very social in today’s time, where living space is extremely scarce, but at the same time the politics – without considering this – allow everyone into the country to build an entire single-family house for 2 people.
That’s not what he meant. Of course, you always have the right to live however you want, alone, as a couple, or with family in an apartment, condominium, or house.
Only the size should fit your lifestyle. A 9x10 floor plan and two stories is far more than many families build.
If you yourself think that your equity and/or salary don’t quite fit the federal state, an industry comparison, or whatever, you should plan the house somewhat more economically according to what you can afford. I don’t want to downplay it and come with the 109 sqm flair for 4 people, but for two it could already become a decadent house in terms of size.
Everyone can do as they please, but then you probably don’t need to ask here if it’s feasible.
I forgot to mention that €2,000 special repayments per year on the loan are also planned.
Although €2,000 on that loan amount is actually nothing.
A manageable rate of €3,000 would be over 50% of the income, was that serious? With €1,600 only the “cold” rate was meant, without additional costs, so without electricity, garbage, water, property tax, internet, and so on and so forth.
30%/35% of salary is still only a guideline for family living, so in comparison to fixed living costs that a bank always considers regardless of income. Assuming one ignores the fact that you also consume more if you have more income to spend.
If you assume that a couple has €1,500 (just thrown out there, I don’t remember the exact figures) in living costs, then with a total income of €4,500 and financing of €1,500 they are within this guideline and still have another €1,500 left to spend.
If the couple now had €5,500 available, the living costs in theory remain the same, but at the same consumption level they have €1,000 more left over. They could use that money to spend, save it elsewhere, or put it directly into a healthier financing. What you apparently are doing is not choosing a healthier financing but an excessively large, bigger house, a permanently higher consumption, but a sick financing.
By the way, we were also only allowed to plan our second house for two people. We were fairly generous with the space. It came to about 132 sqm, including technology, walk-in closet, and storage space. Some 4-person families wished for over 50 sqm of open space. With clever layout, there would have even been a child’s room of about 14 sqm left over. We also had roughly 35% for the financing. It could have been more because the children already have children themselves and thus we are done and have more to spend.
Annual special repayments were almost always the full 5%. That was/is slightly more than one month’s total salary.
As the house has already been lived in for 10 years, I don’t have exact figures anymore.
But: 140/150 sqm should actually be enough, if a child still comes.
I need to replan & reduce the size of the house in the working planning.
It has already been mentioned several times: that doesn’t work.