Home construction financing confusion

Dear experienced property owners!

My partner and I will soon purchase a used property. Basically, we have the financing in place and also a financing commitment from [debeka]. The financing plan is straightforward and we like it. Only slowly are doubts creeping in as to whether it is the right or most economical decision. The financing is as follows:
Total financing €195,000
1st component: Annuity loan of €136,000 at 3.53% interest, TG 1.7%, and term of 35.5 years. Monthly payment €562
2nd component: Loan of €39,000 at 4.5% interest, TG 2.5%, and term of 15 years. Monthly payment €261
3rd component: KFW energy-efficient renovation €20,000, 1% interest, TG 1%. Monthly payment €66
This amounts to a total monthly rate of €889.
The good thing for us is the long fixed interest period and the moderate rate. In addition, the rate will generally become cheaper after 15 years, since the freed-up 2nd component can flow into the TG of the 1st.

Of course, we also have other offers, but we are leaning towards this one.
I am throwing this in here for the sake of one opinion or another. Otherwise, one just goes around in circles somehow.

Thank you very much and greetings from Osnabrück.

Dear experienced builders!

My partner and I will soon be purchasing a used property. Basically, we have the financing in place and also a financing commitment from debeka. The financing plan is quite simple and we like it. Only slowly are doubts creeping in as to whether it is the right or cheapest decision. The financing is as follows:
Total financing €195,000
1st component: Annuity loan of €136,000 at 3.53% interest, closing costs 1.7%, and a term of 35.5 years. Monthly payment €562
2nd component: Loan of €39,000 at 4.5% interest, closing costs 2.5%, and a term of 15 years. Monthly payment €261
3rd component: Kfw energy-efficient renovation €20,000, 1% interest, closing costs 1%. Monthly payment €66
This makes a total monthly installment of €889.
The good thing for us is the long fixed interest period and the moderate rate. Also, the rate will generally become cheaper after 15 years, since the freed 2nd component payment can be applied to the closing costs of the 1st.

Of course, we also have other offers, but we tend to go with this one.
I'm throwing this in here to get one or the other opinion on it. Otherwise, you somehow keep going in circles.

Thank you very much and greetings from Osnabrück.

I find the 4.5% interest on the smaller loan relatively high now.
How much equity are you bringing in?
Are special repayments possible in order to utilize the freeing-up rate after 15 years at all?
How long are the fixed interest periods?

How long is the fixed interest period for the first two loans mentioned? This is not evident from the text.

KFW does NOT have a program energetically renovate (151?) with 1% repayment!!!

Why only 20TEUR of this program? It would definitely be possible to do significantly more.

Evening!

So we are bringing in equity of 50,000. The fixed interest periods are: 1st component: 35.5 years, 2nd component 15 years, 3rd component 10 years. Yes, the funds that become available definitely have to be invested. Against this background, we also find this model attractive. Low payments with a long term and fixed interest rate. Sure, the 2nd component is expensive, but will be paid off relatively quickly. Partial repayment possible here after one year. For the 1st component only after 10 years. I don’t find that dramatic either. So, good deal?

Regards

Stop. With KFW, it is of course 1% interest and 3% TG.

I believe my predecessor referred to the first loan, whether special repayments (or changes to the repayment rate) are possible, so that after repaying the second loan, this amount can be used in addition to repaying the first loan.

The 3.53% with this fixed interest rate sounds quite favorable, the 4.5% sits heavy with me, even with only, or precisely because it is only 15 years. This part will probably be the subordinate loan, but with 50,000 EUR equity, the interest rate should actually be significantly cheaper. I would have clearly expected a 3 in front of the decimal point, even without knowing the exact details now.

Loan 195 (136+39+20) + equity 50 = 245 TEUR, from which now approximately 10% ancillary costs are deducted = purchase price 200 TEUR + 20 TEUR renovation, now the matter of the lending value. If this corresponds to the purchase price, it would be <90% LW. If the bank makes deductions, this is of course unfavorable and the loan corresponds to the LW and it would thus be a 100% financing. Unfortunately, I do not know the current spreads at the moment, but just from feeling, this component should be somewhat (significantly) cheaper.

Assuming the 136 TEUR are 60% LW, then the LW of the house would have to be somewhere around 226 TEUR (including renovation). That would be very optimistic for a bank at the guessed purchase price. However, then the smaller loan would be clearly too expensive! If it is only 80% LW, the value of the house would be 170 TEUR (including renovation). If I follow this assumption (and I rather believe this), then the financing from the bank's perspective would be a 115% financing and then I can well understand this interest rate for the subordinate loan. Then one should, however, consider whether the purchase price is justified.