On Nationwide SVR and looking to move and borrow more

golly99

Hi

Quick bit of advice, currently on Nationwide 2.5% SVR and looking to sell and borrow more to move up to a bigger property..only my 2nd move and just hit the big 40

Would I need to get a remortgage and therefore lose the svr and move to say a 10yr fix at 3.14% or could I have the two mortages one with the svr and one at 3.14%? My initial reaction would be wanting to keep the svr as it has more flexibility overypaying/borrow back (as well as the smaller rate, but obviously not fixed).

Many thanks

betmunch

You would be getting a new mortgage with two accounts, not a remortgage.


The first account would port the terms of your current mortgage, ie the flexability and rate.


The second account would be the additional borrowing on whatever the current product range is offering.


Be aware that porting your rate is not guaranteed, you will be assessed as if a new customer, just because you have £xxx,xxx now doesn't mean they will still offer you that much going forward.

golly99

Thanks, that's very useful.

liseloo79

Hi we done this with our nationwide mortgage which was on the same rate when we moved and Borrowed more.

We were able to port the original mortgage which stayed at base rate plus 0.5% and borrow the extra on a different product, this is the only way nationwide did it when we moved but it was almost 2 1/2 yrs ago

It means that our mortgage payment is split into two separate amounts which could be a bonus for you if you want to pay it at different times of the month

Lisa

Jhoney_2

betmunch wrote: »

You would be getting a new mortgage with two accounts, not a remortgage.


The first account would port the terms of your current mortgage, ie the flexability and rate.


The second account would be the additional borrowing on whatever the current product range is offering.


Be aware that porting your rate is not guaranteed, you will be assessed as if a new customer, just because you have £xxx,xxx now doesn't mean they will still offer you that much going forward.

In your experience, is it just as difficult where you wish to port less betmunch? I appreciate affordabilty still applies, but are some lenders a bit more open to the prospect?

betmunch

Jhoney wrote: »

In your experience, is it just as difficult where you wish to port less betmunch? I appreciate affordabilty still applies, but are some lenders a bit more open to the prospect?

In the main the amount, more or less, doesnt matter. You are either accepted or not, and if accepted you can borrow what their affordability calculator allows.

Having said that, some lenders will allow clients to port a mortgage when they are reducing the loan AND the loan to value even when they are declined by the computer. This is a special concession though and certainly not easier than a standard application.

Jhoney_2

betmunch wrote: »

In the main the amount, more or less, doesnt matter. You are either accepted or not, and if accepted you can borrow what their affordability calculator allows.

Having said that, some lenders will allow clients to port a mortgage when they are reducing the loan AND the loan to value even when they are declined by the computer. This is a special concession though and certainly not easier than a standard application.

Thanks for reply.

Yes I have a been informed that there is an element of leeway etc - I just want to ensure I can reduce my lending without being further penalised - I am happy to be subject to affordability MMR etc, - otherwise I will just retain the higher amount I have and repay allowable lump sums or stick it in a high interest account as my rate is low atm.

Much appreciated.

Thrugelmir

Jhoney wrote: »

Yes I have a been informed that there is an element of leeway etc - I just want to ensure I can reduce my lending without being further penalised - subject to affordability MMR etc, otherwise I will just retain the higher amount I have and repay allowable lump sums or stick it in a high interest account as my rate is low atm.

Lenders are required to assist borrowers as far as possible. So if the borrower is put into a better financial position by reducing the mortgage debt owed and perhaps releasing equity to clear other debt. Then actually the lender too receives the benefit of a lower risk exposure and their customer not running into financial difficulty. Administering delinquent accounts is a costly and time consuming exercise. Far simpler just to allow a straight forward port.

Jhoney_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Lenders are required to assist borrowers as far as possible. So if the borrower is put into a better financial position by reducing the mortgage debt owed and perhaps releasing equity to clear other debt. Then actually the lender too receives the benefit of a lower risk exposure and their customer not running into financial difficulty. Administering delinquent accounts is a costly and time consuming exercise. Far simpler just to allow a straight forward port.

That's what I would have thought, but one hears of that not always being the case even with transitional rules etc, so I was not about to count my chickens re mtg reduction success!:)

I am hoping that will be my lenders view too.

FYI no debt, financial difficulty or delinquent accounts apply in this instance. I just want to relocate at some point and know the alignment of the varying hoops one must jump through.

I like to plan ahead.

Thrugelmir

Jhoney wrote: »

That's what I would have thought, but one hears of that not always being the case even with transitional rules etc, so I was not about to count my chicken re reduction success!:)

I am hoping that will be my lenders view too.

FYI no debt, financial difficulty or delinquent accounts apply in this instance. I just want to relocate at some point.

There's often far more to a tale than gets written on open forums. At higher levels finance people are pragmatic and if there's a credible plan that stands up to scrutiny there should be no issues.

Jhoney_2

No mysteries here, i'm afraid - hence it's a footnote to an existing thread. I have amended my posts to be clearer as I was in a hurry.

Thanks again!