Is this a case of a lender trying to lure borrowers with unobtainable headline rates, a borrower with too large a downpayment to qualify for CMHC insurance, or a lender seeing higher risk in a RE portfolio than is immediately apparent? -vreaa
A poster at RE Talks made a comment 2 Dec 2009 about Sutton 5 year fixed rates of 3.6%. This was followed by this comprehensive revelation from westar99 13 Dec 2009 4:32 pm -
“The Sutton rate is almost impossible to qualify for, [even though] I had a Sutton agent last spring  when I bought a new place. I had a great credit score, late thirties, no dependents, $160,000 per year upper management salary, employed for more than five years at the same company, a 50% $400,000 cash down payment from the sale of my paid off old property towards an $800,000 property, two cash flow positive investment properties with 30% of the value in equity and an investment portfolio/RRSP’s worth $300,000, nothing outstanding for any line of credit, and they still turned me down. But then they told me I could qualify for another “special” deal which was slightly worse than the rate I negotiated with RBC. My Sutton agent told me that he hasn’t had one client who qualified, and they even turned down a dentist client of his. He told me he is very frustrated with this marketing “gimmick”.