HuggyLilly
2014-05-04 18:04:35
- #1
Hello,
no matter how I calculate it, I somehow can’t get anywhere. I have now sold my house and want to downsize with a used small house.
Equity after paying off all debts = 65,000 euros. But I don’t want to invest all of it; I want to put aside 20,000 for emergencies, so 45,000 remain as equity.
Two used houses that interest me as examples
House A - Built 1975
80,000€
+4,760 broker fee
+4,000 property transfer tax
+1,600 notary, land registry, etc.
--> so 10,360 incidental costs, a total of 90,360.
If I now subtract the incidental costs from my 45,000€ equity, 34,640€ remain.
Since everything in the house has to be redone (bathroom, floors, front door, windows, etc.), it will be tight with the equity if I should finance 100%.
House B - Built 1971
135,000€
+8,100 broker fee
+6,750 tax
+2,400 notary, land registry, etc.
so 17,250 incidental costs, a total of 152,250
In the house, not much needs to be done, garden about 5,000, bathroom 15,000, painting work.
Equity 45,000 less incidental costs -> 27,750 remain for renovation if I finance the purchase 100%.
I am in public service, permanently employed, net salary currently 2,000,-
How is it possible not to fully finance a used house? There almost always has to be something done, doesn’t it?
If I now take a loan with an 80,000 limit at 60% = 48,000 euros credit, no one could buy and renovate a house with that, right?
Where is my thinking error?
no matter how I calculate it, I somehow can’t get anywhere. I have now sold my house and want to downsize with a used small house.
Equity after paying off all debts = 65,000 euros. But I don’t want to invest all of it; I want to put aside 20,000 for emergencies, so 45,000 remain as equity.
Two used houses that interest me as examples
House A - Built 1975
80,000€
+4,760 broker fee
+4,000 property transfer tax
+1,600 notary, land registry, etc.
--> so 10,360 incidental costs, a total of 90,360.
If I now subtract the incidental costs from my 45,000€ equity, 34,640€ remain.
Since everything in the house has to be redone (bathroom, floors, front door, windows, etc.), it will be tight with the equity if I should finance 100%.
House B - Built 1971
135,000€
+8,100 broker fee
+6,750 tax
+2,400 notary, land registry, etc.
so 17,250 incidental costs, a total of 152,250
In the house, not much needs to be done, garden about 5,000, bathroom 15,000, painting work.
Equity 45,000 less incidental costs -> 27,750 remain for renovation if I finance the purchase 100%.
I am in public service, permanently employed, net salary currently 2,000,-
How is it possible not to fully finance a used house? There almost always has to be something done, doesn’t it?
If I now take a loan with an 80,000 limit at 60% = 48,000 euros credit, no one could buy and renovate a house with that, right?
Where is my thinking error?