Funding Risks in High-Yield Property Investments: The Co-Living Challenge

High-yield investments in properties such as co-living spaces attract investors with their strong cash flow potential, yet they face significant lending challenges from conservative banks.

The Promise and Perils of High-Yield Property Strategies

Although co-living and similar high-yield property investments can deliver impressive rental returns, securing adequate finance is often problematic. Traditional banks usually implement restrictive lending practices that limit the amount of rental income they consider for serviceability.

The Income Recognition Gap

Lenders typically only account for 70% to 80% of the gross rental income when calculating an investor’s borrowing capacity. For instance, a weekly rent of $1,000 might be reduced to an effective income of only $700–$800. This conservative approach can restrict the loan amounts available, especially for investments reliant on rental income.

Commonwealth Bank's Conservative Policy

• Only up to $150 per week from a boarder is considered for serviceability.
• Applicants must provide a statutory declaration, adding extra administrative steps.
• The policy explicitly excludes income from investment properties and bridging loans.

Even if the actual rental income is much higher, these measures serve as risk mitigation strategies, reflecting a broader industry tendency to limit exposure to variable income streams.

Regulatory Influences on Lending Practices

Recent guidelines from ASIC have reinforced responsible lending, causing banks to be even more conservative in how they recognize income. This results in many non-traditional income sources—including multiple co-living tenants—being discounted or ignored entirely during serviceability assessments.

The Impact on Co-Living Investments

Co-living properties, which are structured to accommodate several tenants and thereby generate greater rental income, may ironically suffer from lower calculated income figures due to these lending policies. Short-term leases and incomplete documentation can further undermine an investor’s borrowing capacity.

Example Scenario: Consider an investor who buys a 4-bedroom house for $750,000 with a potential co-living income of $1,600 per week (i.e. $400 per room). Although the cash flow is robust, the lender might only acknowledge 70% of that income, or $1,120, thereby potentially reducing borrowing capacity by $100,000 or more compared to a full income recognition scenario.

Risk Assessment from a Lender’s Perspective

1. Income Stability: Multiple tenants can lead to higher turnover, affecting income reliability.
2. Wear and Tear: Intense property usage may accelerate depreciation, impacting long-term value.
3. Market Variability: Specialized rental markets are often more sensitive to economic fluctuations.
4. Regulatory Concerns: Inconsistent local council regulations regarding multiple occupancy can add uncertainty.

Navigating the Funding Landscape

Investors can consider several strategies to mitigate these funding hurdles:

1. Collaborate with Specialized Brokers

Seek mortgage brokers who have a nuanced understanding of lender policies. They can identify banks or non-bank lenders with more flexible criteria for non-traditional investments.

2. Enhance Documentation

• Maintain thorough records of all rental incomes, including signed leases and past rent statements.
• Keep detailed property management reports that capture occupancy rates and tenant longevity.

3. Consider Alternative Lenders

Some lenders offer specialized products that:

• Recognize 100% of rental income for serviceability purposes.
• Utilize alternative models that suit co-living arrangements better.
• Adopt a portfolio lending approach that evaluates overall investment performance.

4. Diversify Borrowing Capacity

Reducing dependency on rental income can also help:

• Ensure strong personal income streams.
• Minimize other existing debts.
• Accumulate equity from current properties before venturing into co-living investments.

Conclusion

While co-living and other high-yield property models offer attractive returns, investors need to prepare for substantial financing obstacles. Conservative income shading, regulatory oversight, and inherent risks in co-living arrangements necessitate careful planning and informed lender selection.

Understanding these financing challenges is essential for successful investment planning. With thorough preparation and guidance from industry experts, these challenges can be effectively managed.

Need assistance with your funding options? Begin your investment journey today at chat.investorprofile.com.au.