Toronto Investment Property Purchased Under Holding Company with B-Lender Stated Income

1. Executive Summary

Three friends pooled money to buy an investment property in Toronto. All three were self-employed. They earned decent money, but their income was not reflected strongly in their T1 Generals or corporate financials. They also had million-plus mortgages on their personal residences, which created additional debt-service pressure. They wanted to purchase the investment property under a holding company. Not all lenders allow purchases under a holding company, so lender selection was critical. We obtained approval from a B lender under a stated-income program supported by 12 months of bank statements, and the clients purchased the property under the holding company.

2. Borrower Profile

The borrowers were three self-employed friends purchasing an investment property together in Toronto, Ontario. Their actual income was stronger than what appeared in their personal T1 Generals and corporate financials. Each borrower also had significant personal residence mortgage obligations, including million-plus mortgages. Borrower identities, businesses, income figures, credit scores, existing mortgage amounts, bank-statement deposits, and lender name are not disclosed.

3. Property Profile

The subject property was an investment property in Toronto, Ontario, purchased under a holding company. Exact address, property type details, purchase price, down payment, mortgage amount, loan-to-value, projected rent, rate, fees, and lender name are not disclosed.

4. The Challenge

The file had multiple layers of complexity. There were three borrowers, all self-employed. Their actual cash flow was stronger than what appeared on personal T1s and corporate financials. They already carried large mortgages on their personal residences, which created significant debt-service pressure. The property was being purchased as an investment, not a primary residence. The clients also wanted title under a holding company, which reduced lender options because many lenders do not allow or do not prefer holding-company purchases.

5. Why Conventional Solutions Failed

A traditional A-lender approval was difficult because the borrowers’ reported income did not support the requested mortgage strongly enough. Their personal T1 Generals and corporate financials did not reflect their actual cash flow, and they already carried large personal mortgage obligations. The holding-company ownership structure also reduced lender options because not all lenders permit purchases under a holding company. The file needed a B lender with both stated-income flexibility and holding-company acceptance.

6. HopeWell’s Analysis

Our analysis focused on cash-flow reasonability and ownership-structure fit. The borrowers were not simple salaried applicants. Their real income had to be reviewed through bank statements, and their existing mortgages had to be factored into the overall risk profile. We also had to confirm which lenders would allow the property to be purchased under a holding company. The file was positioned for a B lender that could consider stated income supported by 12 months of bank statements and accept the holding-company structure.

7. Financing Structure

The file was structured as a B-lender investment-property purchase mortgage under a holding company. The stated-income support came from 12 months of bank statements. The lender reviewed the borrowers’ self-employed profile, existing personal mortgage liabilities, proposed property ownership, and overall reasonability. Public details do not disclose the lender name, mortgage amount, rate, term, amortization, fees, purchase price, down payment, rent amount, holding company name, or income calculation.

8. Why the Solution Worked

The solution worked because the lender’s policy matched the file. The borrowers had income, but it was not captured well through standard T1 and corporate-financial review. The B-lender stated-income program allowed the file to be evaluated using bank-statement evidence. The lender also accepted the holding-company purchase structure. The underwriting principle is that investment-property files involving corporations require both income flexibility and title-structure flexibility; one without the other may not be enough.

10. Related HopeWell Resources