I'm in the market for a mortgage for an investment property.
I have a pretty much perfect credit history and zero current debt other than a mortgage on my principal dwelling (and in that case the house is worth at least double the mortgage value).
In addition, the rental market is very strong where the investment property is located. I should easily be able to charge enough rent to cover the mortgage costs each month.
I was pre-approved for a mortgage with a tiny little local credit union (G&F Financial) about a year ago when I first decided to purchase this property.
In the meantime, I've changed employment.
Okay, I understand that any lender would be cautious if the conditions of an initial agreement have changed. They have every right to re-examine my application.
But, they've not only decided not to honour the original approval, but aren't even in the running any more. Apparently, they don't want my business, even if they could charge a higher interest rate or change other requirements.
My mortgage broker was immediately able to find an alternative lender for me. Which indicates to me that I'm not really a bad customer or risky proposition.
Like the previous examples, where companies would rather lose a customer and hurt their brand reputation than lose a small amount of revenue, this company would rather lose a customer and hurt their brand reputation than take on a TINY bit more risk.
Whatever a brand is insisting on (whether it's maximizing revenue, zero risk, immediacy, or something else), they need to ask themselves if this insistence is worth losing a customer.
No comments:
Post a Comment