Subsequent change of the lending value - What happens?

  • Erstellt am 2019-05-17 07:02:55

Noelmaxim

2019-05-17 10:51:52
  • #1


Firstly, not as a general rule (especially not with Allianz!) and secondly, I do not see the point or the economic advantage either.
 

Zaba12

2019-05-17 11:00:26
  • #2

It was clear that you like that.
But I stand by it.
 

Noelmaxim

2019-05-17 11:36:58
  • #3


Completely wrong, I cannot confirm this statement in relation to 90% of banks at all. If I increase the costs and increase the requirement, then I agree; but if the costs remain the same and the requirement is reduced, then a lower lending ratio results, which can lead to better conditions. This assumes that the approved and available funds are sufficient to realize the project as stated in the submitted construction documents, the contract for work or architect’s contract, and the construction service description.

This becomes clear, among other things, when it comes to the amount of own contribution, which increases both the costs and the available funds and balances out in the financing plan, but with a higher own contribution lowers the lending ratio despite the neutralization in the cost plan. The own contribution – of course only if it is planned – must be added to the requirement and then deducted again if available. If I do not do this, different lending ratios result and these can lead to significant deterioration in conditions.

Not a few consumers conceal or do not consider parts of their equity in the financing plan even in the case of modernization because they believe they will provide this as own contribution, and this leads to shifts in the lending ratio determined by the bank for the conditioning, since value-increasing measures are not made accessible to the bank. In a new build, this own contribution item is a variable element that lowers the lending ratio in interplay with the architect and the construction company.

Furthermore, one should also know and consider that every builder can make shifts with regard to the trades, is not 100% bound to the cost breakdown, and can make changes during the construction phase. In addition, one must and should know that for many banks the costs, the cost plan, are decisive for determining the lending ratio and thus for conditioning, and not the internally determined desk appraiser or appraiser value, and thus the conditions are determined based on the cost plan. If you know this, then you also know that the costs can be prepared accordingly, because an architect does nothing else, and for one, a trade costs €2,000 and for another €3,000, similarly one house costs this from one company and the same house costs that from another company. No bank controls every construction progress in detail, no bank compares this with the stated costs, rather it is decisive that the builder is aware of his costs and builds the house with the available funds in the way that the construction documents, the contract for work or architect’s contract, and the construction service description stated and confirmed at the time of application.

These variables and this little flexibility allow the preparation of acquisition costs to be designed so that one or two percent can be improved and the next better lending limit can be reached.

Before complaints arise, of course the internal cost planning must work out if own contribution is factored in, but it does not have to be identical 1:1 with what is submitted to the bank, so that the house will then be completed as presented to the bank.
 

yellow_ms

2019-05-17 11:50:00
  • #4


Loan interest < commitment interest. We finance through Allianz. Our 18 months commitment-free period ends in October. Due to significant delays, a large part of the loan is still outstanding. Until October, several installments will become due, which we will now cover with debt capital instead of equity. According to construction progress, the loan can be drawn proportionally, and I was assured that one has access to this amount - regardless of whether all equity has already been used.
 

Noelmaxim

2019-05-17 11:58:24
  • #5


But at the beginning, during the commitment-free period, I first use my equity in order not to have to pay interest due to the free period.

I am not saying that this is not basically possible with Allianz, but as an intermediary, I can think of a handful of banks that make it easier under equally good conditions (and Allianz is really good here) when handling it. I also think that their accommodation and goodwill should be considered depending on the customer with their creditworthiness and the loan-to-value ratio.
 

Tassimat

2019-05-17 12:18:36
  • #6


I would consciously use the loan first. So exactly the other way around..

Besides the interest, the repayment also starts, so that at the end of the fixed interest period there is less loan remaining. Otherwise, for example, with a 10-year term, you might have only repaid for 9 years.
 

Similar topics
19.02.2013Is a Riester loan useful for my case?13
30.04.2012No equity, good income, financing feasible?22
20.06.2013Problems with equity - real estate purchase15
02.09.2013Loan of EUR 500,000 - possible with monthly income?17
06.04.2015Our financing with "own contribution"12
02.02.2016It doesn't work without equity - experience!109
23.01.2016Assessment of financing offer - Which repayment36
26.07.2016Calculation of equity capital in connection with KfW loan28
30.09.2016Equity understanding problem41
04.09.2019Avoid commitment interest - 100% loan payout13
06.05.2020Financing offer HVB vs. Allianz18
02.06.2020How much reserve in addition to equity?20
16.06.2020Loan-to-value ratio and property purchase in cash?12
12.08.2020How to correctly determine the loan amount when there is a lot of personal contribution?15
07.02.2022Assessment financing 425k, equity 200k, net 5k - unmarried51

Oben