I was thinking about the real, underlying costs of moving home loans (say every few years). It's the interest that is charged (verse principle) that I would like confirmation one.
To make it simple let's ignore discharge fees, legal fees, annual account fees, etc, … just focus on the interest rate.
Is this a correct statement: If I move from one lender to anther and the interest rate is more attractive, I am in a better position IF I KEEP THE SAME DURATION OF THE LOAN. This is the part I was not sure about, as you know you always pay more interest in the first 5-7 years before you eat into the principle. If, when moving, you keep the duration of the loan the same, then the interest payment formula would not disadvantage you? Is that right? … I picture that repayments graph that is very flat in the first few years and if you move lenders will you ultimately be paying more interest they you would have if you stuck with the original loan?
Is this probably a no brainer for some, and I'm 90% sure I don't think it disadvantages you to move, but just wanted to check (there is no internal bank wizardry and/or trickery at play)… thanks.