There is a Plan 5 which Brendan didn't mention-
I would like to compliment Brendan for the time and effort he made to try and help LauraHi Laura I'm currently in the same process and have been unable to negotiate a better deal. There is a Plan 5 which Brendan didn't mention- apply for a positive equity tracker mover informing the bank you are putting both properties on the market and the profit from both sales going toward new morgage decreasing morgage ask for new property. This for me having mulled over the options above over the last four months seems to be my best option! Hope that helps.
If we are to stay in the same area where our kids are settled in schools\clubs etc etc 4bed houses
HI GTRE
Isn't that the default plan which the first figures show?
ptsb should allow you move the €210k tracker to a new property with an additional margin of 1%.
Isn't the amount outstanding on the PDH €310k? If both properties were sold and the outstanding €310k tracker was ported to another property would that not make the figures more attractive?
If both properties were sold and the outstanding €310k tracker was ported to another property would that not make the figures more attractive?
That is what I am suggesting in Alternative Plan 3
However there is a cross charge on the property against the family home mortgage and we have been told by PTSB that if we sell the rental property they will need a capital reduction on the family home mortgage if the LTV ratio is greater than 60%..
When the lender issued the loan to buy the home, the OP gave their investment property as security as well.
So it's perfectly reasonable for the lender to ask that this security not be disposed of. Or to ask that the LTV on the home be reduced in order to release the security.
Also just to raise a further point on this issue; All bank charges are now taken as "All Money Charges". This in effect means that while you may have a number of separate loan facilities with a bank that are all independently secured a bank may refuse to release security even in the event that the associated loan is repaid if it feels that it is not satisfied with the risk relating to the remaining facilities. This is an option that can be used at the bank's discretion!
Reducing it to 60% seems excessive, but they are well within their rights to have it reduced to, say 70%.
Yes, it's perfectly legal. It was a contractual condition at the time the mortgage was issued.
Brendan
Absolutely! I'm not sure as to whether "fairness" comes into the head of any large business CEO's head when decisions are being made. If the contract with the client allows you to use leverage to reduce/eliminate an unprofitable loan exposure most banks will do so!But it's probably not an issue of fairness here. She has a fantastic tracker. ptsb are not under any legal or moral obligation to do a deal with her to allow her continue with it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?