All Topics / Help Needed! / Selling and serviceability
Hi guys looking for some advice/input
I currently own 5 properties. 3 are cash flow positive and 2 are not.
The 2 that are not cash flow positive are in Gunnedah NSW. Each property has about 50K equity. Each property has a holding cost of $110pw.
I know some people say not to work backwards but from a serviceability point of view would it be better to sell both properties and use the equity to purchase more cash flow positive properties. Would this be a step forward???
Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Regards
Matt
What do you mean by serviceability? As in lender serviceability? You need your broker or banker to tell you exactly how much your servicing will be in both scenarios. There are also ways you could increase your servicing.
TheFinanceShop | Elite Property Finance
http://www.elitepropertyfinance.com
Email Me | Phone MeResidential and Commercial Brokerage
Am I able to service more properties being cash flow positive and running with the scenario I proposed???
How can you increase your serviceability???
Regards
Matt
Yes you can. Different ways you can increase your servicing; 1. Different Lenders will lend different amounts. For example CBA is very conservative, 2. Fixing a portion of your loan (but I would recommend against this for a number of reasons). For example, Westpac increases the servicing if you fix the loan. 3. Factor in Negative Gearing into the income calculations 4. Look at possible renting your PPOR whilst living with parents 5. Decrease credit card limits to the bare minimum
TheFinanceShop | Elite Property Finance
http://www.elitepropertyfinance.com
Email Me | Phone MeResidential and Commercial Brokerage
So in your own opinion, sell or hold to therefore move onto other cashflow positive properties. As they have holding costs surely from a borrowing and servicing point of view it would be better to sell and reinvest with the equity into cash flow pos property.
Regards
Matt
I can't possibly give you a definitive answer without looking at the whole picture and anyone who does it talking out of their backsides. Yes its obvious that a negatively geared property is not fantastic for servicing however there is more to it than that. Have you factored in selling costs? Have you factored the short, medium or long term potential for development of those properties? How long will it take before you convert those NG properties to PG properties? Personally I have a hold strategy but that is because I land bank and look at maximising by properties to become positively geared or there is some potential for capital growth.
I own a property which I sat on for about 7 years before the zoning changed and allowed for sub-division. I bought it at a steal, sure enough it was negatively geared for a while but I was happy to ride it out until the zoning changed for me to do what I wanted with the property. Sorry for the long reply but its not that black and white.
TheFinanceShop | Elite Property Finance
http://www.elitepropertyfinance.com
Email Me | Phone MeResidential and Commercial Brokerage
Is there much chance of good capital growth in Gunnedah?
You also have to assess the opportunity cost of holding these. If you sell it will improve serviceability, possibly assist you in paying down non deductible debt, and allow you to get into investments with higher returns (possibly).
Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
http://www.Structuring.com.au
Email MeLawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au
Hi Matt
It's impossible to advise without kowing the specifics of your situation.
There are also other ways of improving serviceabilty before selling a property. Here's an article I wrote.
one of the best ways to assist in not hitting a servicing wall too quickly is lender selection – using the right lenders at the right time as you accumulate IPs.
Cheers
Jamie
Jamie Moore | Pass Go Home Loans Pty Ltd
http://www.passgo.com.au
Email Me | Phone MeMortgage Broker assisting clients Australia wide Email: [email protected]
Jamie, say for example I purchase an IP which after all costs nets me $20 per week before tax considerations @ 80% LVR, is this the best possible result from a serviceability perspective.
Cheers
Matt
mba422 wrote:Jamie, say for example I purchase an IP which after all costs nets me $20 per week before tax considerations @ 80% LVR, is this the best possible result from a serviceability perspective.Cheers
Matt
Matt, what do you mean? $21 per week net would be better than $20.
For serviceablity the more income you have the more you can service. The less loans you have the more you can service.
Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
http://www.Structuring.com.au
Email MeLawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au
Terry, after all holding costs are paid, each week the property pays me a passive income of $20 per week.
mba422 wrote:Terry, after all holding costs are paid, each week the property pays me a passive income of $20 per week.Are you wanting to know if this helps serviceability or hinders it?
It would probably hinder because:
1. Banks assess loans at a higher interest rate, and/or
2. Banks take into account x% of the rent, often 80%
But, it would be much better for serviceability than if it was a negative $20 per week.
Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
http://www.Structuring.com.au
Email MeLawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au
Hi Matt
The extra $20 can't hurt – and I assume it's only an example because if we're talking about $20 being a deal breaker in terms of your borrowing capacity then it might not be worth pursuing.
Different lenders have different ways of working out your borrowing capacity – some use 100% of rental income while the majority use somewhere between 75% to 80%
Cheers
Jamie
Jamie Moore | Pass Go Home Loans Pty Ltd
http://www.passgo.com.au
Email Me | Phone MeMortgage Broker assisting clients Australia wide Email: [email protected]
Hello Shahin,
Can I ask why fixing a loan hurts serviceability? Why is wrong to do? I am still learning, so can you please explain.
thanks!!
Fixing loans doesn't usually hurt servicing – it can actually improve it because the bank may use a lower assessment rate (ie. the inflated rate that they apply to your repayments to see if you can still meet your liability in the event that rates go up).
There's a lot to consider before fixing though.
Cheers
Jamie
Jamie Moore | Pass Go Home Loans Pty Ltd
http://www.passgo.com.au
Email Me | Phone MeMortgage Broker assisting clients Australia wide Email: [email protected]
Thanks Jamie! With the interest rate being so low right now, I was thinking it would be a good time to fix. What other things should be taken into consideration?
Hi Jewel,
Fixing your loan helps (by a decent margin) your serviceability with some banks including Westpac. However, interest rates are going down plus there are certain restrictions that apply with fixing your loan hence why I recommend that you should not consider fixing your loan unless its your last resort and the extra borrowing power supersedes the disadvantages that come with fixing your loan. So in short see which lender will lend you what about, look at the negative gearing component, etc.
Regards
Shahin
TheFinanceShop | Elite Property Finance
http://www.elitepropertyfinance.com
Email Me | Phone MeResidential and Commercial Brokerage
By the way there are no problems in fixing as some need to fix to manage risk.
TheFinanceShop | Elite Property Finance
http://www.elitepropertyfinance.com
Email Me | Phone MeResidential and Commercial Brokerage
In the main you wouldn't fix the loan merely and utterly to improve your serviceability although in saying that i have done this for a few clients but mainly as a matter of planning going forward.
Fixing rates is a risk minimisation tool which can be used effectively depending on your own circumstances.
Going back to Matt's serviceability questions Yes in the main a positively geared property will mean you can borrow more than you could if the property was negatively geared but again in saying this can't remember the last deal that fell over for a few dollars of rent.
I wouldn't sell down my portfolio merely because they were costing me $20 / week as the whole picture needs to be assessed.
Cheers
Yours in Finance
Richard Taylor | Australia's leading private lender
Richard, the holding cost is $115 per week not $20 per week.
Cheers
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.