Employer loan is not sufficient

If I understood everything correctly, the demand is 250, but the employer agrees to 180. That would be a gap of 70. A consumer loan is out anyway, it’s also too expensive. Then, what about the 250? A house with land for 250 doesn’t work even in SH. Is Halle that cheap? Or is this wishful thinking? What kind of employer lends 180 to a privately insolvent person? I am a bit skeptical. Of course, one could save half of a classic home savings contract with 70 thousand, then borrow the rest. That would start the problem. Only that requires patience. Please keep in mind, because we just had the final invoice, that an inexpensive house in an inexpensive area still costs 285 thousand euros including landscaping etc. That’s just how it is. Those are real amounts paid. Karsten

10% equity says my banker otherwise there is no loan.

10% equity says my banker, otherwise there is no loan.

Yes; of course. But there are banks on the market that see it differently. It always depends on the overall package.

In this case, however, I view the immensely high shareholder loan with skepticism.

Of course there are. In the USA there were even banks that gave every bum money for a house. But how does the customer see it? It is also a kind of self-protection to have equity. I even think it should preferably be 25%. The loan should be cheap, I should be rid of it in a reasonable time, say 25 years max., and it absolutely should not fail. If these parameters do not fit, either more savings have to be made or the construction plans have to be slimmed down, or one has to admit that a house is too expensive at the moment. Karsten

Hi Nicole, nobody is stoning anyone here; however, I can only agree with the opinions expressed here. For now, keep your hands off the project. It won’t work under the current conditions. Better wait a few more years. After the PI and with more equity, you will build much more relaxed... Best regards

Of course they exist. In the USA, there were even banks that gave every bum money for a house. But how does the customer see it? It is also a form of self-protection to have equity. I even think that 25% would be preferable. The loan should be cheap, I should be free of it within a reasonable time, let's say max 25 years, and it should definitely not fail. If these parameters don't fit, either more savings are needed, or the construction projects must be scaled down, or one has to admit that a house is currently too expensive. Karsten

Hm. I am of the opinion that a reasonable term is again individual. If I am in my early 30s and only have 15% equity, the financing may also be allowed to last longer.