Guarantor Home Loan Guide and AMA

Saving $1,000s in bank fees is on every OzBargainer's wishlist, and a guarantor home loan can help you achieve this.

A guarantor loan is a means for a home buyer to get onto the property ladder sooner, with a smaller deposit.

In it's simplest terms, it's a loan secured against your new purchase property AND your parent's property. There's more collateral for the bank, therefore less risk, so they're prepared to lend you more money.

Traditionally you'd need 20% deposit saved up, however here's a quick run through (and happy to take questions) of a guarantor loans to debunk the misconceptions.

Note I will be broad and general here, bank policies around guarantor loans are very intricate and vary greatly, so I'll try and give you a flavour of what can and can't be done. No advice given, do your own research.

Ok here goes…

1) You effectively need zero savings. Yes, you read that right.

As the bank uses equity /security / collateral from mum and dad's property, you can borrow against a portion of their property, providing you demonstrate the ability to repay the whole loan yourself.

2) You can also borrow additional amounts for stamp duty, legal fees and associated purchasing costs. This does normally exclude debt consolidation and renovations however.

This means you can borrow more than the purchase price, usually capped at 5% of the cost, i.e. $500k purchase price = maximum $525k loan.

3) You'll avoid all LMI (Lender's Mortgage Insurance) fees, as the bank will assess you akin to borrowing with a 20% deposit.

This LMI cost saving can be around 3% of the purchase price, i.e. $15,000 saving on a $500k purchase. Now that's an OzBargain!

4) Mum and dad's income can generally not be taken into account.

Why?

Well, if you're the one buying, owning and living in the property, the bank will likely ask what's the benefit to them being on the loan. And there isn't one.

5) I keep referring to "mum and dad" as that's the most common setup, however this can extend to immediate family (offspring, siblings, parents, grandparents)

They'll need to be in a decent financial position with good equity held (small or no loan against their property)

6) Guarantor's don't stick around forever. As soon as you have a 20% holding (with a bank valuation) and demonstrate good repayments, you can request to remove them for good.

7) The risks. If you stop making payments, you're risking mum and dad's property. Simple as that. Get income protection.

If mum and dad want to sell their property in the short term, a guarantor may not be the right option for you. In this case, the bank may ask you to stump in the applicable LMI fees, which can set you back $1,000s.

8) Not all banks like guarantor loans. Some flat out don't do them. Some will ask lots of questions, some have minimal requirements.

There's only really a handful of banks I think have really nailed guarantor loans.

Hope you found this guarantor runthrough useful, hit me up with your questions!

About me - I've been in home lending for 8 years and settled well over 1,000 home loans, including dozens of guarantor loans, and 46 happy OzBargainer loans to date.

Thanks for reading,
Aidan Hartley.

Comments

  • +4

    Why is there just a single line explanation of what happens to mum and dad when the loan defaults?

    • Fair call, what else would you like to know?

      • +2

        How the family is torn apart from this scenario and everyone put into decades long debt perhaps…

  • +9

    1) You effectively need zero savings. Yes, you read that right.

    People that can't save money borrow $1M. What can go wrong?

    Answer: Ma and Pa getting rekt.

    • Absolutely! We do find however that when people have a home, they will often make cut backs in lifestyle to keep that home.

      • +8

        People that don't have savings have no risk management.

        They aren't scared of defaulting because they didn't put the collateral. This is playing with other people's money.

        • In all my years of home lending, I find the opposite to be true. What are you basing this on?

          Whether they have 20% savings or not, people are usually pretty keen to keep the roof over their head.

          • -1

            @footyboy: It's not difficult to save a few $10,000s.

            Why doesn't the borrowers have any savings? They having zero savings is an indication that they're spending their full NET income.

            People like this have zero risk management.

            • +1

              @rektrading: The post was to shed some light on bank lending policy and to show what's possble for renters, single parents etc. who may struggle to save a traditional 20% deposit.

              Have a great weekend!

              • -1

                @footyboy: I think that leverage is an important and necessary tool for people to accumulate assets. It should only be provided to people that show proper risk management.

                People that don't have any savings are high risk and shouldn't have access to leverage.

          • +1

            @footyboy:

            I find the opposite to be true. What are you basing this on?

            You've provided 1000s of loans, but only dozens of them have been Gauranteed loans. That's probably not a large sample size for you to base your own opinion on either.
            Loan brokers tend to be considered similar to car salesmen and lawyers. Not all are bad, but the reputation is they look out for themselves more than their customers.

            And personally this post is coming across as a bit of an advertisement, where you want people to ask you questions (maybe send you a private message where you can follow up with them), rather than you providing a public service announcement.

            • @dizzle: I agree, they're only suitable for a very small number of borrowers. It's a niche rather than a main solution.

        • +1

          100% true

      • And this is precisely why our economy is tanking - spending cutbacks.
        You eat into disposable income you reduce the mobility of money and thus end up with an indebted nation, asset rich but liquidity poor.
        The longer that policies favour this situation the longer the economy will go on nowhere, with an entire generation slaves to the richer older boomers.

  • +6

    We do not need the lengthy opening post.

    Simply this.

    A guarantor home loan shifts most of the risk from the borrower to the guarantors.

    • +1

      Technically the borrower's home would be sold first. So no, not quite! Hence this post, to debunk some myths.

      • +1

        And then the guarantors, so both properties would be sold and if it is still not enough then contents and other belongings etc

        Another marketing spin to lure in the people who do not understand the wording.

      • +2

        This is not necessarily correct.
        There are cases where the guarantee is limited, or where the primary security must be realised first, but most bank guaratees I see give the bank the right to treat the guarantors as jointly and severally liable for the full amount equally with the borrowers, and to chose how they realise any security, so it is entirely up to the bank to decide whether they sell the borrowers' property first, or not.
        Are you telling me the only guarantee loans you offer provide limited recourse on the guarantors?

        • Yes. I only do limited guarantees for this reason. They all need independant, legal advice too so they know exactly what theyre getting into.

          Guarantor loans are only really suitable for a small percentage of buyers, with parents who have a strong asset position.

  • -2

    Hmm, buys million dollar house, market corrects, Mr Margin Call comes-a-knockin' and now everyone including mum and dad gets to live in a tent?

    • Assuming by market you mean property market.

      The future value of your home does not affect your ability to repay the loan.

      As with any home loan, if you stop paying, it won't be yours for much longer.

      • So what happens if you hold a 500K security over a house that devalues to 300K?

        • +1

          Nothing if you keep paying your repayments.

          • @footyboy: So you wouldn't adjust your LTV figures? OK I guess…..

            • +1

              @EightImmortals: Nope. No margin calls on home loans if values drop.

              Margin lending for shares on the other hand…

          • @footyboy: I have definitely seen a number of home loan lender terms and conditions that list re-assessment of Loan to Value ratio as being a potential reason for the lender to claim a bulk payment.
            i.e. if the lender has agreed to a 90% LVR, and market conditions change, which result in the loan now exceeding 90% of the valuation price of the home, the lender can come looking for an immediate payment of $xxxxxx to bring the loan value back below the 90% threshold that had been agreed upon.

            • +1

              @bweiss: True, there are some lenders that may do that.

              None of which I'd recommend for this type of loan.

  • +1

    Should also mention your ability to take out new loans is impeded (e.g. if you want to buy your own investment property) if you go and guarantee someone else's loan.

    • Not necessarily. The guarantor is not borrowing, so affordability is not impacted.

      If you have enough equity there is no effect on new borrowing whatsoever.

    • +1

      100% agree as you will need to disclose this in the loan application paperwork.

  • +4

    Some good debate here today. Clearly not everyone agrees with guarantor loans, and that's fine!

    The fact is, it's a perfectly viable options for a small percentage of buyers with under 20% saved up. And those people are the ones this post is aimed at.

    I'd rather try and educate than just put up a rate post đź‘Ť

  • What's the main reasons that a loan will be defaulted that you have seen?

    • Most common I've seen is marital breakdown, where one party just stops paying the repayments.

      The banks would much rather find a solution with you than force you to sell your home.

  • Interesting that you mention grandparents.

    Whilst I never entered into a guarantor loan, banks werent going to consider one as my father had retired and was self funded. They said responsible lending prevented them from bringing him into it.

    Therefore, is it legit to say grandparents? I can't see how banks would allow this.

    • Yep, I can think of maybe one or two, but it's possible.

      It really comes down to their asset position.

      FYI, some banks will assess your Father's income, but also some won't (as he's not a borrower)

  • How does registering the guarantee over the guarantor's property work?

    Does the guarantor's property need to be unencumbered to make it work? Otherwise, is the borrower forced to use the same bank as the guarantor? I can't see the banks wanting another bank on the title as well.

    I think it is also worthwhile to point out that certain professions also get LMI waivers for 10% deposits with certain banks, which is probably a better option than putting someone else's property on the line (in case of default)

    • Hey, so it would be either a first or second mortgage, depending on whether the guarantor has a current mortgage over their property.

      The property does not need to be unencumbered. They can't be too highly leveraged however, they must have enough equity to comfortably guarantee the 20% of the borrower's loan.

      Yes, you can have parent's at one bank and the borrower with another bank. This is possible with a second mortgage.

      Yes, there are LMI waivers for medical and highly professional roles (lawyers, accountants etc) however a guarantor may be an option for someone who isn't one of those.

  • Thanks for the info there!

    Can I bring a different question to the table?

    I've recently bought a house (last November) and may be moving soon, however I don't want to sell my current house and want to rent it out and buy a second house where I move to…

    In my case, I have ~$200k house with ~$165k remaining loan, also with a $30k car loan. I am the sole owner and will be on the next house as well, my income will also approximately double at the new job!

    So my question is, what would be best to pay down first? Pay off the car loan completely… or get more equity by paying down the house loan first?

    Thanks alot in advance!!

    • +1

      Pleasure, thanks for the positivity!

      Generally speaking, paying off the higher interest rate debt would make more sense.

      i.e. home loan at 2% or car loan at 6%, you may want to pay down the car loan first. This is very general and is not personalised advice or a recommendation.

  • Have you ever seen a situation where the guarantor’s house has actually been repossessed and sold? Or where the guarantor is made to pay the shortfall on sale of the main account if they defaulted and there was negative equity? I wouldn’t think this is too common.

    • Personally no, but technically it can happen.

      Mostly the guarantor would chip in funds until the borrower returned to work, or if they had to sell AND a shortfall, they would cover the gap.

  • I did this to help out my son. He had a bit over 10% genuine savings plus costs, and was quite happy to continue saving till he had the 20%, but then the FHOG for existing properties was coming to an end and he wanted to take advantage of that while he could. The guarantee was limited to only the amount needed to support his loan at 80% LVR. He and his partner just firehosed that mortgage, and in conjunction with some property appreciation, they were able to release the mortgage over my house within a couple of years.

    It's not for everyone, but as parents you have a fairly good idea of your kid's commitment and spending etc, so you're the best judge of whether it will work for you. Obviously if your child is profligate you'd think twice!

    • Boom! Great success story, thanks for sharing.

Login or Join to leave a comment