Deloitte mortgage rates

redmaker382 said:I’m guessing you called about that bridge loan—the one from Wells Fargo? Assuming you don't have any cash sitting around, you're looking at paying 40% more on a $100,000 loan because they end up covering the rest of those housing savings contracts for you. But honestly, let redmaker382 break it down for you; they'll explain it way better.
Here are a few of their calculations—I’m pretty sure I’ve already posted these somewhere else:
If you’ve got nothing and they bump you up to, say, $75,000, that just means they're footing the bill for the difference.
So you’re looking at a 40% down payment, which means you're essentially borrowing about $125,000. At that rate, your monthly payment hits $565 for a term of roughly 20 years. But, if you’ve got an extra $800 tucked away to throw at it? Your payment drops to $555 and you shave six months off the loan. Not a bad way to play it.

Since the banks just announced they're hiking interest rates by another full percent, I guess I'm officially broke.
He'll just weigh his options and go wherever he thinks he'll get a better deal.

Check out this interesting link.

Check out this link on how to get funding for home renovations. It’s basically a guide to navigating all those different loan options and grants available right now.

Ashley Barnes9 said:I’ve been following this thread because I’m looking into mortgage options myself, so I gave Wells Fargo a call directly. For a $100,000 loan over a 24-year term, they quoted me a monthly payment of $690 at an AT&T rate of 4.99%.

Meanwhile, at Bank of America, for that same amount with an AT&T rate of 5.70% on a 20-year repayment plan, the monthly payment comes out to $699.

That means you're paying it off four years sooner, which ends up saving about $33,120 in total (48 x $690 = $33,120).

You can verify these numbers on the Bank of America website; this specific loan is tied to USD for people under 40.

I got pretty much the same results over at Chase... so, there you have it... 😉

redmaker382 said:I’m guessing you called about that bridge loan—the one from Wells Fargo? Assuming you don't have any cash sitting around, you're looking at paying 40% more on a $100,000 loan because they end up covering the rest of those housing savings contracts for you. But honestly, let redmaker382 break it down for you; they'll explain it way better.
Here are a few of their calculations—I’m pretty sure I’ve already posted these somewhere else:
If you’ve got nothing and they bump you up to, say, $75,000, that just means they're footing the bill for the difference.
So you’re looking at a 40% down payment, which means you're essentially borrowing about $125,000. At that rate, your monthly payment hits $565 for a term of roughly 20 years. But, if you’ve got an extra $800 tucked away to throw at it? Your payment drops to $555 and you shave six months off the loan. Not a bad way to play it.

Since the banks just announced they're hiking interest rates by another full percent, I guess I'm officially broke.
He'll just weigh his options and go wherever he thinks he'll get a better deal.

Check out this interesting link.

Check out this link on how to get funding for home renovations. It’s basically a guide to navigating all those different loan options and grants available right now.

Ashley Barnes9 said:I’ve been following this thread because I’m looking into mortgage options myself, so I gave Wells Fargo a call directly. For a $100,000 loan over a 24-year term, they quoted me a monthly payment of $690 at an AT&T rate of 4.99%.

Meanwhile, at Bank of America, for that same amount with an AT&T rate of 5.70% on a 20-year repayment plan, the monthly payment comes out to $699.

That means you're paying it off four years sooner, which ends up saving about $33,120 in total (48 x $690 = $33,120).

You can verify these numbers on the Bank of America website; this specific loan is tied to USD for people under 40.

I got pretty much the same results over at Chase... so, there you have it... 😉

Ashley Barnes9 said:I think they’ve already factored in the rate hike here. But even if you go with their most expensive option at a 6.27% APR, it’s still a better deal since the monthly payment on a 20-year term would be around $775, so the difference is negligible.

For people who have their savings sitting in Wells Fargo and are just financing the remaining balance up to the agreed value, this is definitely more cost-effective than a standard loan. However, for those who have $0.00 savings and need to cover that interim financing period, a traditional bank loan is clearly the way to go—mostly because of the exact reasons you mentioned, which these savings institutions tend to hide like a snake in the grass.

By the way, that's exactly how those predatory lenders operate; they jack up the base rate until it's three times higher than it should be. Even with the legal interest rate cap at 14%, you end up looking at a real effective rate closer to 50%...😁

Ashley Barnes9 said:I’ve been following this thread because I’m looking into mortgage options myself, so I gave Wells Fargo a call directly. For a $100,000 loan over a 24-year term, they quoted me a monthly payment of $690 at an AT&T rate of 4.99%.

Meanwhile, at Bank of America, for that same amount with an AT&T rate of 5.70% on a 20-year repayment plan, the monthly payment comes out to $699.

That means you're paying it off four years sooner, which ends up saving about $33,120 in total (48 x $690 = $33,120).

You can verify these numbers on the Bank of America website; this specific loan is tied to USD for people under 40.

I got pretty much the same results over at Chase... so, there you have it... 😉

Donna Chase12 said:That link you dropped is ancient—it’s from October 2006—and it’s just talking about a basic mortgage at Wells Fargo, not some bridge loan...

Donna Chase12 said:Wait, I just realized what you actually wrote here...
I mean, how can you even compare loans with different terms?!... Goldman Sachs offers up to 24 years (they told me 24 is the max, not that it *has* to be 24—it could be "only" 20), while JPMorgan Chase is at 20?! Of course, comparing them like that makes JPMorgan Chase look better than it actually is.
So, I just ran the numbers myself—assuming both loans have the exact same term, meaning we're looking at 20 years for the Goldman Sachs one too—to see what the actual difference would be.

JPMorgan Chase - 20 yrs - $699 monthly - total payout $167,760
Goldman Sachs - 20 yrs - $690 monthly - total payout $165,600
That means the Goldman Sachs loan ends up being exactly $2,160 CHEAPER. If you don't care about that kind of cash, fine, whatever.
But honestly, I'm pretty sure if I asked for a quote on the Goldman Sachs loan for 20 years, that monthly payment would drop even lower... which just proves it's the better deal.

And let's not forget—your math for JPMorgan Chase falls apart the second interest rates tick up, whereas the Goldman Sachs calculation stays solid just like it is now... and will stay that way for the next 20 years.

Michelle Foster13 said:I mean, what even is this... 🙄

Did you even bother asking them to run the numbers for the exact same number of years?! I mean, obviously, if you stretch out the repayment period, you're going to end up paying way more in interest—plus, both your monthly payment and the total debt amount will be higher!

I actually ran the math myself using the same timeframe, and the difference was only about 3 dollars.

Michelle Foster13 said:I have to admit, I’m still feeling pretty confused after visiting them—and I’ve actually been there twice now, once on Monday and again today. Honestly, the more I go in there, the less sense it all makes to me! 😲

...but hey, I finally made my choice. I think what really tipped the scales was the fact that they’ll give me a little extra cash upfront to help with some new windows and furniture. Other banks just aren't offering that. I guess those other places assume that since I've been working at Resolute for 20 years, I'm perfectly happy sleeping on a beach towel until my loan is paid off before I can afford anything nice 😕

Oh, and one more thing—I don't really need a deposit. I'd much rather go with a co-signer option (or maybe two if I decide to ask for a bit more to cover the renovations).

redmaker382 said:I should point out that Bank of America calculates interbank financing differently than Goldman Sachs does—you can actually see that right on their own websites.
I don't think Ashley Barnes9's math is really the gold standard here. I mean, let’s be real, he isn't so naive that he'd accidentally overpay someone by $30,000 over four years; if that were possible, it wouldn't be a bank, it would be a scam.
Look, you can't rely solely on that spreadsheet calculation; it's just a rough estimate at best.
Plus, since JPMorgan Chase doesn't even offer loans in Swiss Francs anymore (as far as I know), you're better off looking at Erste Bank. They have rates around 5.55%, and if you're already a client, you could snag it for 5.05%.

Donna Chase12 said:Who's this agent... Michelle Foster13? 😂😂😂...I mean, come on, you can tell she hasn't got a clue half the time

Ashley Barnes9 said:Hehe... you missed my point.

Michelle from Goldman Sachs (whoever she may be) calculated that for a $100,000 loan, I'd have a monthly payment of $690 over a maximum term of 24 years. But when I started looking at actual bank offers, I saw that for that same $100,000, I could pay it off in just 20 years with a $699 monthly payment. So, the conclusion was pretty straightforward. Since there's a Bank of America right near my place, I headed over there, and they gave me a very clear explanation of how this intermediate financing works. Just like redmaker382 mentioned, I need $100,000 in cash, but since I don't have any savings, the bank essentially lends me $140,000, and they charge interest on that full amount. They take that extra $40,000 and deposit it into a savings account for me; then, once that term ends, depending on the specific model, they apply that "saved" amount toward my principal to bring it back down to the original $100,000 I actually received, which is what I continue to pay off.
😁

That’s why some people wonder how you can end up with a higher monthly payment despite a lower interest rate at the savings bank, and why you'd practically have to recruit your entire extended family just to get a slightly better rate through the Democratic Party.

It's honestly pathetic.

Of course, the pitch is always that it won't cost you anything extra—yeah, right. There are all sorts of little fees for reports, processing, or mailing statements, and who knows what else. Basically, if you're recruiting six people, prepare to shell out at least an extra $33 per month.

By the way, your math doesn't quite add up because $690 x 24 years equals $198,720, so I have no idea how you reached your totals.

With the same amount at JPMorgan Chase, I'd be paying what you noted: $699 x 20 years = $167,760.

In the end, I'd pay $30,960 less at JPMorgan Chase... 😁

Then again, maybe that lady just made a mistake and miscalculated her numbers, so please, make sure to triple-check everything if you're planning to take a loan from them. 🤣

Here is a link where you can see the annuity schedules for JPMorgan Chase loans: JPMorgan Chase

And here for Chase. Chase

For the others, you'll have to do your own homework.

redmaker382 said:Regarding that 5% fixed rate—I’m with you. No way that works according to any standard loan calculator; if that were actually possible, nobody would be bothering with traditional bank loans anymore.
The one you mentioned is definitely the worst deal since it has the longest term, but honestly, I’m looking for a solution just like that too. I’ve been over to Michelle from Goldman Sachs more times than I can count, and I’ve already run ten different scenarios along with my little savings plan, but there are still some annoying details tripping me up.
Every single calculation shows a different APR, even though I’m using the exact same savings percentage.
So, quick side question: can you actually get a tax deduction on interest for a standard mortgage, or is that perk exclusive to those specialized savings institutions?
It would be great if someone who’s actually taken out one of these loans could DM me their specific numbers. I don't want to go around complaining, but I have a feeling it’s all more or less the same thing anyway.
They have a few tricks to reel you in, but at the end of the day, it's just marketing.
Personally, I’m still sitting on the fence about whether I’ll pull the trigger with them until I am absolutely certain this is the real deal.

gaultier;12215114 said:

Here’s what I found on their websites regarding that loan I applied for. Because of my credit score, I can't qualify for a shorter term, so I'm looking at a max of $1333 which is what I'm currently paying. I was hoping the monthly payment would be lower since they claim it will be, but it doesn't look like it...

"Offers the longest possible repayment term with the lowest monthly payments. Upon loan disbursement, funds are used to satisfy the requirements for reaching 40% of the contract amount for the Contract Corp housing savings agreements used for interim financing. The loan term lasts up to 24 years. The monthly installment remains fixed throughout the entire term at 0.415% of the total contract amount. During the savings period (before becoming eligible for the housing loan), the client pays the monthly installment while simultaneously earning government incentives and a fixed 1.5% annual interest rate on savings. Once eligibility is met, the total savings—including government incentives and interest—is applied toward the interim financing loan (for example, based on $20,000 in savings and 4 family contracts, the gain is $700). The client then continues repaying the loan with that same monthly installment (0.415% of the contract amount).

So, according to their own website LINK, it clearly states the payment stays constant at 0.415% of the total. It also says that once the loan is finalized, 40% of the agreed amount goes immediately toward the savings portion. This means if we need $100,000 in hand, we actually have to take out a loan of about $166,500, because once you subtract that 40%, you're left with exactly $100,000 for the payout.

You can check the math yourself: if you multiply the total loan amount ($166,500) by their 0.00415 coefficient (0.415%), you get a monthly annuity of $690.97. That is the exact number the agent gave me over the phone. If more family members participate in the savings plan, the amount might drop slightly due to those government incentives and the 1.5% interest, but compared to the total, it's negligible...

The payment still ends up being around 5 $0.00.

I'd love for someone from Wells Fargo to tell me I'm wrong, if I've misunderstood anything...