Comparing a 7.82% ten-year fixed mortgage quote in France

O

otis.elm

Buyer
Established
APR is useful for screening the offers, although I am not convinced it should decide between them. For a Paris purchase of about €372,600, one illustration offers 7.82% fixed for ten years, but the two lenders have used different assumptions about fees and loan-to-value.

I plan to ask for both quotes to be rerun with the same deposit, loan term and repayment basis. I can then compare the upfront charges, 120 monthly payments and remaining principal, while checking whether any fee is added to the borrowing. After that, the choice depends on whether the monthly payment remains manageable and how likely I am to move or repay early, since portability and exit terms may matter more than a small difference in the headline calculation. I do not want the comparison to assume refinancing after year ten will be straightforward.
 
Use APR as an initial filter, but compare the offers over the period you realistically expect to keep the loan. For a ten-year comparison, put the upfront fees, 120 payments and outstanding balance at year ten side by side. Cash paid alone can mislead if one illustration repays more principal than the other.
 
The missing figure is the actual loan amount. €372,600 is the purchase price, but what deposit are you putting down and what loan-to-value tier did each lender use? Also check whether arrangement fees are paid upfront or added to the balance. Different loan amounts or fee treatment would explain why the illustrations diverge.
 
That’s the key point. The OP needs both lenders to rerun the illustration using the same loan amount, overall term and repayment structure. I’d also ask for the monthly payment and projected balance after ten years in writing. Otherwise even two correctly calculated APR figures may be answering slightly different questions.
 
One separate caution on portability: don’t assign it much value until the lender explains exactly when it applies and what happens if the next property or borrowing amount differs. The same goes for early repayment—ask for examples of both a partial repayment and a full payoff during the fixed period.
 
I wouldn’t make APR the main decision figure here. It is useful for a standardised comparison, but your likely exit point matters more. If you expect to sell or repay within ten years, fees and early-repayment terms can dominate. If you expect to keep the debt longer, the post-fix terms and remaining balance deserve equal attention.
 
The refinance assumption is where I’d stress-test this. Run three simple cases at the end of year ten: refinancing is attractive, refinancing is available but no cheaper, and refinancing is not practical. You don’t need to predict rates; you need to know whether the current loan remains affordable if your preferred exit does not happen.
 
Before optimising the ten-year totals, look at the monthly payment in an ordinary and a difficult month. A technically cheaper offer is still the wrong one if it leaves no room for property costs or income disruption. Does the 7.82% apply to the same borrowed amount and repayment schedule in both illustrations?
 
A small spreadsheet should settle most of this. For each lender list: cash deposit, amount borrowed, fees paid upfront, fees added to the loan, monthly payment, total paid by year ten, principal repaid, balance remaining, and early-exit cost at a few relevant dates. Keep portability as a separate conditional benefit rather than subtracting an assumed value from the cost.
 
I’d send both lenders the same requested assumptions and ask for revised side-by-side illustrations. Then choose based on your realistic holding period, not the advertised rate. If the monthly payment at 7.82% is uncomfortable without a future refinance, that is already useful information; a hoped-for lower rate later should not be required to make today’s purchase work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top