Cairo mortgage quote: comparing 6.37% fixed for two years

R

RealMoss

First-time buyer
Established
6.37% is the quoted rate for the first two years. The proposed purchase is around EGP 68,160,000 in Cairo, but fees and the applicable LTV pricing mean the headline comparison does not tell me enough.

I am leaning toward comparing all payments and charges during the fixed period together with the balance remaining after year two. That only works, though, if I also know the full term, repayment structure and what rate or pricing method follows the fix. A refinance may be possible, but I do not want the decision to depend on that assumption.

Would you reject the quote until those figures are supplied, or keep it as an option subject to acceptable arrangement fees and early-repayment conditions?
 
For a two-year fix, I would compare the cash paid during those two years plus the remaining loan balance at the end. Monthly payments or total interest alone can mislead because two offers may reduce the principal at different speeds. Put arrangement fees, valuation-related charges and any mandatory recurring costs into the same calculation if they apply to the quote.
 
What are the quoted loan amount, full mortgage term and repayment structure? The EGP 68,160,000 purchase price does not reveal the actual loan-to-value. You also need the lender’s rate or pricing method after year two; otherwise the attractive fixed period is being compared in isolation.
 
I would not make APR the main figure unless every lender calculates and presents it on a genuinely comparable basis. A simple two-year cash comparison is easier to audit yourself. That said, it should include the cost of leaving at the end of the fix, because a refinance assumption is only useful if early repayment and switching costs do not erase the saving.
 
That is the gap in my worksheet. I have the purchase price and headline quote, but I need each lender to confirm the same loan amount, term and post-fix treatment before the rows are comparable. I will add the balance after 24 payments, all upfront fees, any early-repayment charge and whether portability requires a fresh affordability assessment.
 
Portability deserves caution. Even if the mortgage can theoretically move to another property, the lender may still need to approve the new property and circumstances under its terms at that time. I would treat it as flexibility rather than a guaranteed exit route and ask for the exact conditions in writing.
 
The spreadsheet should also stress-test monthly affordability after the fixed period. Run at least a few higher reset-rate scenarios without assuming refinancing will be available. On a purchase of this size, a quote that is slightly cheaper for 24 months may still be the worse choice if the later payment would strain cash flow.
 
I partly disagree with dismissing APR. It can still expose a fee-heavy offer, particularly when the advertised rate is lower than the actual quote. I would use APR as a warning signal, then verify it with the two-year cash-and-balance calculation. Neither measure is sufficient by itself when the rate resets so soon.
 
A practical comparison table could have one column for cash needed at completion, one for monthly payment, one for total payments and fees through month 24, and one for the balance then. Add separate notes for the reset basis, early repayment and portability. That keeps affordability, short-term cost and exit risk visible instead of forcing everything into one number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top