Error in financing?

The design of the headline suggests a newspaper with a large circulation, headquartered in Hamburg, and four letters.

And there I was even successful.

So: why am I not surprised that what is recommended there is exactly the same as what we have been preaching here for days? Everything described there is no secret.

I quote:
"and at least be able to pay real estate transfer tax, notary fees, and broker commission yourself."
"Because a safety buffer is missing in case the owner has to sell his house again after a few years."
"Do not enter into a real estate financing without any equity."
"You should be able to easily pay a loan installment with a repayment of at least three to four percent per year."
"The monthly installment should not exceed 30 to 40 percent of your net income."
"Sometimes banks also require the conclusion of a residual debt insurance. Or they want additional collateral as security, such as an existing whole life insurance policy or a securities portfolio."

>>> Should we rewrite all these things for you on a case-by-case basis?

ui and this is written by the great XXXX

I see Henrik the budget manager in front of me sweating privately because price increases are pouring in from every side. Then threads like "Handwerker will charge an extra €99.75 for a siphon" are started here

You are mean HilfeHilfe. We all just want to help him. And I even believe that one thing or another was understood and taken on board.

Great... I just read the article and immediately thought of this thread and wanted to post the link really really quickly You are so mean!!!

yes..that's even true...current plan is:

- As before, repay the remaining debt
- Then asap save up the incidental purchase costs as the first "hurdle", so that it would then be a maximum 100% financing.
- Depending on how fast everything goes, money will probably still be saved in parallel until the plot is found and construction is completed, so that it could then come under 100%.

That means reassessing again how the market situation is, etc.

At the moment I am also more uncertain again between the options of prefab timber frame house (previously preferred), existing property, and completely self-designed with architects and co. - i.e., solid house - or even prefab/project in solid construction.

As you can see, we are still very much at the beginning, if that is not even clarified. Everything is very expensive and everything has pros and cons.

Existing property often with a basement, outdoor facilities done, etc. ... but logically no free planning and renovation/modernization costs ... new build very expensive regarding outdoor facilities and timber frame possibly ... depreciation instead of appreciation.

Pretty annoying. BUT: The most important insight here from the thread is probably that we should have at least over 100%, although I don't know exactly what counts towards that. In our project with land and then prefab house, those would be on the one hand the incidental land costs and then also the incidental construction costs like earthworks etc.?

That means with the new build you come to about 50k on a 400/450k project, which is above 100%?

Too much text again.

Again: Safety costs money. A lot of safety costs a lot of money.

With a 30-year fixed interest rate, 50% of the interest costs are precisely this safety.