BLOG / NEWS Updates
Utilize Private Funds In Your Real Estate Today!
We as the general public have been spoiled by the low bank rates being offered to date. Many investors become so enticed by low interest rates that they do not even consider the option of using private funding when they are declined by the bank, and as result, they turn away from a purchase or refinance that could have generated great profit for them. First of all, why are more and more people getting declined by the bank? Today the banks have become very difficult to work with. This is because they have imposed extremely strict requirements for approvals and if you do not meet their exact credentials, you are declined and your buying power has been diminished. I am sure many have experienced such frustrations on the new and improved banking protocol, specifically business owners and contract workers who may have difficulty verifying income. Being in the mortgage industry for almost 2 decades now,I have witnessed vast changes in the approval process for both residential and commercial lending. Just a short time ago it was possible to purchase a residential property, single family up to 4 units, with only 5-10% down. Today you would need a minimum down payment of 20% of your purchase price. You must be able to show that you have the funds to support this purchase and if you cannot verify your income as declared on your tax returns, then there is a very high probability that you will be declined. How many individuals have fallen into this category because of being self-employed? Majority of these individuals are the ones that are seeking alternative investments such as real estate for long term stability because of a lack of post retirement pensions and government support. Iwant to inform all of you investors that we cannot let the banks criteria stop our real estateendeavours! We have access to private money where these strict rules do not apply. The approval processfor private funding is based on commonsenseapproach. A common sense approach entails analyzing a deal objectively and all-encompassing. A feasibility analysis would be conducted along with an appraisal of the property, and any relevant documentation would be requested on deal specific basis. Although the interest rates are higher, with private funding there is significantly more flexibility with closing times (mortgages can close within a matter of days!), income confirmation, loan to values, and conditions on a mortgage offer. A higher interest rate is far worth the ability to purchase real estate that could produce great future value and profit that otherwise may not even be a possibility. Since private money can fund quickly, why not use this funding source tonegotiate a better deal for a quick closing, and offset the additional interest rates? I personally am self-employed and I am an avid real estate investor whom uses this technique all the time. I pay the going rates and still have a great success from real estate! Example of how using private money worked for one of our clients: Purchased a power of sale vacant property: $550,000 Used private funding to close Used private funding for a renovation loan Renovated and leased the vacant space Appraised the property after the work was completed: New value $1,100,000 Refinanced with the bank Removed private money: now they have a beautiful property that is cash flowing and their initial investment has been returned. Please note, first mortgage rates for a private loan average from 7-10% annually, second mortgage rates average from 10-15% annually. We can obtain up to 90% of the value of the property on approved credit. On average this is on higher side, however has been funded. Lender fee and broker fee will also apply. Private money will fund land, gas stations, vacant properties, distressed properties, construction, and developmentamongst many others. If you are looking to buy a property and are hitting a wall with your funding, contact email@example.com and we can perform an assessment on your deal today!
Canadian home sales edge down from December to January
According to statistics released today by The Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), national home sales were down slightly in January 2017 on a month-over-month basis. Highlights: - National home sales declined 1.3% from December 2016 to January 2017 - Actual (not seasonally adjusted) activity in January was up 1.9% from a year earlier - The number of newly listed homes dropped 6.7% from December 2016 to January 2017 - The MLSHome Price Index (HPI) in January was up 15.0% year-over-year (y-o-y) - The national average sale price was little changed (+0.2%) y-o-y in January Sales activity was down from the previous month in about half of all local markets, led by three of Canadas largest urban centres: the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Greater Vancouver, and Montreal. Actual (not seasonally adjusted) sales activity was up 1.9% compared to the same month last year. While sales were up from year-ago levels in about two-thirds of all local housing markets including in the GTA, Calgary, Edmonton, London and St Thomas, and Montreal, they were down significantly in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. The number of newly listed homes dropped 6.7% in January 2017, the second consecutive monthly decline. New listings were down in about two-thirds of all local markets, led by the GTA and environs across Vancouver Island. With the monthly decline in new listings surpassing the decline in sales, the national sales-to-new listings ratio jumped to 67.7% in January compared to 64.0% in December and 60.2% in November. The ratio was above 60% in about half of all local housing markets in January, the vast majority of which are located in British Columbia, in and around the GTA and across southwestern Ontario. A monthly decline in newly listed homes further tightened housing markets that were already in sellers market territory. There were 4.6 months of inventory on a national basis at the end of January 2017 unchanged from December 2016 and a six-year low for the measure. The imbalance between limited housing supply and robust demand in Ontarios Greater Golden Horseshoe region is without precedent (the region includes the GTA, Hamilton-Burlington, Oakville-Milton, Guelph, Kitchener-Waterloo, Cambridge, Brantford, the Niagara Region, Barrie and nearby cottage country). The number of months of inventory in January 2017 stood at or below one month in the GTA, Hamilton-Burlington, Oakville-Milton, Kitchener-Waterloo, Cambridge, Brantford and Guelph. In the Fraser Valley and Greater Vancouver, prices have receded from their peaks posted in August 2016. That said, home prices in these regions nonetheless remain well above year-ago levels (+24.9% and +15.6% respectively). Meanwhile, benchmark prices continue to climb in Victoria and elsewhere on Vancouver Island together with Greater Toronto, Oakville-Milton and Guelph. Year-over-year price gains in these five markets ranged from about 18% to 26% in January. By comparison, home prices were down 2.9% y-o-y in Calgary and by 1.0% y-o-y in Saskatoon. Prices in these two markets now stand 5.9% and 4.3% below their respective peaks reached in 2015. Home prices were up modestly from year-ago levels in Regina (+3.8%), Ottawa (+3.7%) and Greater Montreal (+3.1%). In Greater Moncton, home prices for the market overall held steady (-0.2%), reflecting an increase in townhouse row units prices (5.8%) that was offset by a decline in prices for one-storey single family homes (-1.0%). The actual (not seasonally adjusted) national average price for homes sold in January 2017 was $470,253, almost unchanged (+0.2%) from where it stood one year earlier. The national average price continues to be pulled upward by sales activity in Greater Vancouver and Greater Toronto, which remain two of Canadas tightest, most active and expensive housing markets. That said, Greater Vancouvers share of national sales activity has diminished considerably over the past year, giving it less upward influence on the national average price. The average price is reduced by almost $120,000 to $351,998 if Greater Vancouver and Greater Toronto sales are excluded from calculations.
Canadian Housing Starts Trend Increased in January
The trend measure of housing starts in Canada was 199,834 units in January compared to 197,881 in December, according to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). The trend is a six-month moving average of the monthly seasonally adjusted annual rates (SAAR) of housing starts. CMHC uses the trend measure as a complement to the monthly SAAR of housing starts to account for considerable swings in monthly estimates and obtain a more complete picture of the state of Canadas housing market. In some situations analyzing only SAAR data can be misleading, as they are largely driven by the multi-unit segment of the market which can vary significantly from one month to the next. The standalone monthly SAAR for all areas in Canada was 207,408 units in January, up from 206,305 units in December. The SAAR of urban starts increased by 1.0per cent in January to 189,688 units. Multiple urban starts increased by 4.2per cent to 125,886 units in January and single-detached urban starts decreased by 4.6 per cent, to 63,802 units. In January, the seasonally adjusted annual rate of urban starts increased in Ontario and Atlantic Canada, but decreased in British Columbia, the Prairies and Quebec. Rural starts were estimated at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 17,720 units.