Mortgage broker too nosy?

Depends what I invested in- Western Digital(a 100 dollar share for half), Amazon, Google, Apple,Walmart etc
 
Borrowing to invest in shares is generally unwise.

But look at it another way, if I have €100,000 worth of shares already and I borrow €100,000 separately, no mortgage lender takes account of my €100,000 worth of shares.
 
Well they should its an asset on your balance sheet. I know BOI has no debt limits and neither has Finance Ireland. Both likely take an ability to pay into consideration. I suppose one can fiddle it, selling the shares and repaying the loan and taking out same after approval but obviously the Covid loan is at very low interest so I wont be paying that back. Anyway I realised what you are saying and thats why I refixed with BOI last week for 10 years. I recommend anyone take what they can get with their existing lender as the 10 year rates are at 1.9 wholesale and climbing seemingly.
 
I’ve no debt other than my existing mortgage which will be paid once I trade up, hence my surprise at this level of intrusiveness. Did not anticipate that having a bigger lump sum would be a bad thing!
 
mustang01 said:
I’ve no debt other than my existing mortgage which will be paid once I trade up, hence my surprise at this level of intrusiveness. Did not anticipate that having a bigger lump sum would be a bad thing!
Click to expand...

It's not a bad thing, once you can prove its not borrowed money that needs to be repaid to a third party or an attempt to launder illegally gained money.
 
mustang01 said:
I’ve no debt other than my existing mortgage which will be paid once I trade up, hence my surprise at this level of intrusiveness. Did not anticipate that having a bigger lump sum would be a bad thing!
Click to expand...
The intrusiveness is the law under AML and Terrorist funding legislation and the Central Bank Guidelines on these which were originally issued in 2019 and revised last year.

You may have been approved for a higher figure in the past but the reality is that the rules have changed and you are a high risk borrower given the fact that you are a sole trader with existing debt and who has borrowed money to invest.
 
Peanuts20 said:
The intrusiveness is the law under AML and Terrorist funding legislation and the Central Bank Guidelines on these which were originally issued in 2019 and revised last year.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty certain there is nothing in these guidelines that requires any institution to demand paper trails going back several years or indeed decades. If they have concerns about the integrity of a customer or prospective customer, they should be filing a suspicious transaction report as mandated in legislation, but one thing they most certainly should not be doing is tipping off the subject of that report either directly or indirectly by eg making unusual demands of them for the production of historic documentation.
 
lomber said:
Thats crazy 10 Ive no idea whats taking so long to repossess and persue the borrowers for the difference and interest. Likely what happened there was the loans were sold on several times to vulture funds and each time it complicates the matter.
Click to expand...
Not the case at all, most are with the original lender. Sometimes the original lender will sell them on to a sub-prime simply because it is exceedingly difficult to recover a family home. Just read about the cases that have been covered in the media.

As above, you're asking a lender to provide you with significant funds, your opinion and attitude to risk doesn't matter. No share is without an element of risk, and stating that you won't sell until you make a return or get your money back is foolish, if the long term prospects of a particular company are not good, you need to know when to cut your losses.
 
It is crazy but some banks are unwilling to negotiate. As an example my spouse ran into difficulties with a mortgage due to a terminal illness and every offer made to the bank was refused. After years of trying to settle the bank finally recognised that the mortgage was unsustainable and agreed to a voluntary surrender. The condition was vacant possession. There is a tenant refusing to leave. My spouse is very ill and does not have the fight to face the eviction process so it's a stalemate. The bank have even been offered a possession order but they are not interested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register