Financing at the house bank - Offer evaluation

I would currently put a big question mark behind KfW subsidies. A lot of money is missing and the cutbacks will mainly be made where people are demanded who actually wouldn’t need funding if they would price themselves one or two levels lower ;)

yes, maybe, the application would indeed have to be submitted in the next few days. I just wanted to let you know what one could currently expect from the banks

This stalemate will unfortunately continue into next year. Until then, one should consider KfW as a nice bonus, but not make it the (central) part of their financing. That’s what I wanted to say.

Don’t overestimate the full-time grandma and don’t underestimate the second child.
Especially with the age spread, you quickly have the problem that the daycare is in the north and the school is in the south. And the elementary school only goes until 12:30 pm, not like the daycare until 5:00 pm.
If there is no after-school care, the older child stands at the door at 1:00 pm or wants to be picked up at 12:30 pm.

Whether the full-time grandma really does this for years, nobody knows. My mother is also retired, but 3, 4 days with the older one and then she needs a break.

On the other hand, of course you have a lot of equity. Put 100,000 of it aside in case another child comes, then it works out.

And make the house smaller. 170 m² is too big, 150, well planned, is totally sufficient for 4 people. Save about 50,000 EUR. A lot of money at 4% interest.

Don’t overestimate the full-time grandma and don’t underestimate the second child.
Especially with the age spread, you quickly have the problem that the daycare is in the north and the school is in the south. And the elementary school only goes until 12:30 pm, not like the daycare until 5:00 pm.
If there is no after-school care, the older child stands at the door at 1:00 pm or wants to be picked up at 12:30 pm.

Whether the full-time grandma really does this for years, nobody knows. My mother is also retired, but 3, 4 days with the older one and then she needs a break.

I agree with you about grandma. Great for in between. But you shouldn’t plan on her being a substitute mother. Still, it’s a significant relief if work hours don’t quite fit spontaneously twice a week.

Regarding the other point, I would also like to question today’s generation of parents whether they might be making things unnecessarily difficult for themselves. Maybe times have changed. But in my elementary school days, there was no parent taxi. We walked to school alone or with friends for 15-20 minutes in wind, weather, snow, and cold. The same applied to all leisure activities. You would come home briefly for lunch at midday and then go back out alone into nature. Since the high school was also in town, things didn’t fundamentally change after that, only the radius of friendships grew and sometimes the bus was used.

Financially, I am also rather on the skeptical side. Of course, the installment is basically manageable with the current income and with one child. But I still see some risks and a lavish house that does not fit with that.

170m2 plus basement for 3 people? Very comfortable. I don’t quite understand why home office is listed as an argument here, which according to your own statement is only used once a week anyway. Having a completely separate room for that (unless it is tiny anyway) is actually not in any economically sensible relation. You can always fit a desk in a house for rare HO exceptions.

Even for 4 people, 170m2 is still generous and 10m2 less would still be fine. Always keep in mind: you still have a basement and 2 garages (unless there are 2 large SUVs parked there and not at least one smaller car) as storage space.

But regarding the financials:

What bothers me critically is the strong income difference. Could this also be due to tax classes? If not, then you simply cannot compensate for your husband’s failure. Illness or job loss and you have a big problem and the house must go. Your 100% income is simply too low for the installment. For that, you would need significant liquid assets in reserve. But you don’t have this, because everything goes into construction and the kitchen.

Ingolstadt. Let me guess, the husband works at Audi? What happens if jobs get cut (Audi has been lagging behind for several years)? Then, in the worst case, not only the job is gone, but at the same time the value of the house is in free fall (everything depends on Audi there). This is called wrong way risk. Although you have invested a lot of equity so you probably wouldn’t have to file for insolvency, in a forced sale your actually substantial assets would still quickly be largely at risk.

Even if nothing goes wrong (let’s hope so), you are constantly in the hamster wheel with this installment and it necessarily means work instead of time with the family (then possibly with 2 children instead of just one). Not a good feeling. Honestly: plan a bit smaller, maybe also some improvement on the interest side and you get an installment in the lower 2000 range. That way you can certainly sleep more freely. 20 hours of work with an eight-month-old baby? With our child that would have been unthinkable. Much too clingy etc. I would therefore not necessarily assume that it will also work like that with the second child, especially if you already have one and you are also a few years older again (and therefore less resilient).

That is nonsense. You cannot base your financing on never losing your job. Then only civil servants could buy houses, and even they can be transferred nationwide by their employer on a federal or state level.

You calculate with what you have and don’t stretch the loan to the limit. Then it works out.
If you lose your job, you look for a new one.

That’s nonsense. You can’t base your financing on never losing your job. Otherwise, only civil servants could buy houses, and even they can be transferred nationwide or statewide by their employer. You calculate with what you have and don’t take the loan to the limit. Then it works. If you lose your job, you look for a new one.

You can do that, but you also have to live with the consequences if it goes wrong (it could also just be burnout, divorce, etc.). If you have little, you have to calculate that way. Yes, then you have no other choice. But then you also always have a comparable job again. In the salary range, that no longer works so easily. And in this case it is also unnecessary because less luxury (in terms of living space) can largely eliminate this risk already.

In the end, it’s a matter of taste. I would rather have one unnecessary room less and instead a financing that works even in rainy conditions and doesn’t necessarily force me to work at the limit in sunny conditions (which is also good for body and mind and probably provides more benefit than a few extra square meters). That is more luxury for me than a house that fully exploits the current financing framework.

But yes, in the end the OP decides. The financing works in the status quo.