Updated
For residential, commercial and mixed portfolios above $10 million. Every facility, every entity and every income source, assessed the way each lender will see it, with private-bank pathways for qualifying clients. A written view with options, costs and trade-offs, before anything is lodged.
Short assessment to begin. No documents at this stage, no credit check. Enquiries above $10 million go to Ian Webbe, Mortgage Development Manager.
Enter what you know in round numbers. The tool reads back the gearing, the yield, how concentrated the lending is and what a review would look at first. It runs in your browser: nothing is stored or sent, and it is a reading of the shape, not an assessment or advice.
Residential, commercial or mixed. Owner-occupied debt sitting alongside investment and commercial facilities, often with different lenders and terms that were right at the time.
Personal names, family trusts, companies or a self-managed super fund. Each is assessed differently, and the structure between them is where most of the value sits.
Rental, business or trading income, salary, and investment or non-trading income. Lenders treat each one differently, and some lenders treat them far better than others.
Below $10 million? The investment property loans page or the business and commercial pathway is the right place to start, and the same people look at it.
The Portfolio Review is a document, prepared for your position and discussed with you. It has four parts.
Every facility, lender, security, rate type and term in one view, mapped to the entity that holds it, so the whole position is visible before any of it is changed.
Assessed the way each lender type actually assesses it, including how rental, company, trust and non-trading income are treated, and where capacity is being lost.
Separating owner-occupied and investment debt, aligning facilities to entities, releasing equity for the next purchase, and where consolidation helps and where it does not. Sometimes the answer is fewer lenders. Sometimes it is keeping facilities apart on purpose.
With fees, costs and break considerations shown, and the trade-offs explained, so the decision is made on the whole picture rather than a headline rate.
| Security | Held by | Lender | Facility | Terms |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family home | Personal | Lender A | Owner-occupied, offset | Variable, principal and interest |
| Three residential investments | Family trust | Lender A | Investment, interest only | Fixed, ends 2027 |
| Two residential investments | Family trust | Lender B | Investment, interest only | Variable |
| Industrial unit | Company | Lender C | Commercial term facility | Annual review |
| Office suite | SMSF | Lender B | Limited recourse | Variable |
| Development site | Company | Private lender | Short-term facility | Expiry within nine months |
Illustrative only. Entities, lenders, facilities and terms are examples of how a facility map is laid out. They are not a client position and do not describe any lender's products.
Three positions, to show what the review works from and what it works towards. The first is adapted and combined from internal finance briefs with figures and circumstances changed; the two beneath it are hypothetical. None is a client result, approval, quote or promise.
Twelve residential and commercial properties with an indicative portfolio value of $18.4 million and existing lending of $8.9 million across nine facilities with three lenders. Income is a mix of rental, company and investment income.
The structure considered is a total facility of $11.9 million, including up to $3 million set aside for future investment, for an indicative post-transaction LVR of approximately 65 per cent. The structural objective is to separate owner-occupied and investment debt, simplify the facilities and create one senior banking relationship.
Illustrative pricing analysis: a 0.60 percentage-point reduction on the refinanced balance would equal approximately $53,000 a year before fees and other costs.
Prepared under Dayan Kasturiratna and discussed with you before any application is lodged. Enquiries above $10 million go to Ian Webbe, Mortgage Development Manager.
Cross-securing is not a fault in itself. It becomes one the day a single property has to move, because every loan in the group has an interest in that sale. Separating securities is a refinance rather than a variation, so it is assessed on today’s income, not the income that got the original loans approved. The work is sequencing it so a settlement date is never waiting on a lender’s consent.
A lender declining to go further on one borrower is usually a policy limit rather than a view on the file. A second lender can address one lender’s concentration limit. It does not create income, improve security or reduce total debt, so it is not an answer where the constraint is capacity rather than concentration. The commercial security usually sets the pace, because commercial terms and valuations run on a different clock from residential ones.
Illustrative scenarios. One is adapted and combined from internal finance briefs with figures and circumstances changed; the other two are hypothetical positions with rounded figures. None is a client result, approval, quote or promise. Finance remains subject to lender assessment, valuation, documentation and applicable law. Any saving shown is before fees and other costs.
A short assessment: what the portfolio includes, how it is held, the main income sources and what matters most to you. No documents, no credit check.
With your agreement, we collect the facility, entity and income detail we need, using your existing statements and records where we can.
Lender by lender and entity by entity, the way each lender will see it, across our lender and aggregator network, including private-bank channels where the position qualifies.
A written review with options, costs and trade-offs, discussed with you. If you decide to proceed, we prepare the application. If you decide not to, nothing has been lodged.
Enquiries above $10 million go to Ian Webbe from the first conversation. The review itself is prepared under Dayan Kasturiratna, who leads the practice and provides the credit assistance.
Mortgage Development Manager. First point of contact for enquiries above $10 million.
Ian takes every $10m+ enquiry from the first conversation through to settlement: understanding the position, gathering what the review needs, and staying with you while options are assessed and decisions are made. One person, who knows the file, from start to finish.
ian@opulentfinance.com.au
FIPA FFA CTA
Founder and Director. Chartered tax adviser and finance specialist. Australian Credit Representative 394747, under Australian Finance Group Ltd, ACL 389087.
Opulent Finance was established in 2010 and is built around structuring: how debt is held across entities, how income from different sources is treated, and which lender will see a complex position the way it deserves to be seen. Substantial portfolios are where that work matters most.
dayan@opulentfinance.com.auCredit assistance is provided by Dayan Kasturiratna, Australian Credit Representative 394747, authorised under Australian Finance Group Ltd, Australian Credit Licence 389087.
A written review of a property portfolio above $10 million, prepared by a senior broker. It maps every facility, assesses serviceability the way each lender type does, sets out structural options, and provides an indicative pricing analysis with costs shown. It is discussed with you before any application is prepared.
Owners of residential, commercial or mixed portfolios above $10 million, particularly where the properties are held across more than one entity, or where income comes from rental, business, investment or non-trading sources. Below $10 million, the home loan review or the business pathway is the right starting point.
No. The assessment and the review itself involve no credit enquiry. A credit check only occurs if you decide to proceed with an application, and we tell you before it happens.
We explain how Opulent Finance is paid before any application is lodged. In most cases we are paid commission by the lender on settlement, and our Credit Guide sets out how that works and what you are entitled to know. Where a fee would apply to any part of the work, we tell you in writing first.
Not necessarily. Consolidation into one senior relationship suits some portfolios and harms others. The review shows where fewer lenders would help, where cross-securitisation should be undone, and where facilities are better kept apart on purpose. The recommendation follows the position, not a template.
Yes, through our lender and aggregator network, for clients whose position meets each bank's criteria. We describe these as private-bank pathways for qualifying clients because eligibility is set by the banks and changes over time. We do not name programmes or promise eligibility; the review shows whether a private-bank structure applies to your position and what it would change.
Enquiries above $10 million go to Ian Webbe, Mortgage Development Manager, from the first conversation through to settlement. The review is prepared under Dayan Kasturiratna, Founder and Director, who provides the credit assistance as Australian Credit Representative 394747.
It depends on the number of facilities and entities, and on how quickly the statements and records at step two come together. We do not promise a timeframe. We do tell you at each step what is needed and what happens next.
We provide credit assistance and structure lending around the entities you have or plan to have. We do not provide tax, legal or accounting advice. Where a structure decision needs it, we work alongside your accountant and solicitor rather than around them.
Longer reads from our archive, and the guides written new for this site.
A short assessment to begin. No documents at this stage, no credit check. Contact at the time and by the method you choose.
