| Quote: | |  | |
| I had few offers back in time from insurances
- there were very competitive and better than bank offers
however all had in common
- conditions of the service was way less than what bank provided
- insurance was somewhere between the lines of the offering
and overall it would have been 0.3% cheaper to go with Insurance - conditions of "extraordinary termination" were not negotiable and given way too much leverage to the provider - I choose to do old-fashion pay more & sleep well.
Here is pretty good summary of reasons I didn't go with insurance mortgage :
[German]
14. Kündigung von Krediten. []
- der Kreditnehmer mit Zahlungen gegenüber Dritten in Verzug ist;
- die Vermögens- oder Ertragslage des Kreditnehmers nach Einschätzung und Ermessen der Kreditgeberin
wesentlich geändert hat
- die bestellten Sicherheiten nach geschäftsüblichen Beurteilungsgrundsätzen keine genügende Deckung mehr
aufweisen (der Entscheid, ob bestellte Sicherheiten noch eine genügende Deckung aufweisen, steht im alleinigen Ermessen der Kreditgeberin).
https://romann.org/files/romann/pdf/kreditvergabe.pdf
when compared against Bank conditions where there is one liner :
- should I be behind on payment for 60-day they have right to extraordinary termination - that's it. | |
| | |
this varies between institutions. hard to say that there is a trend without more data. i've seen bank mortgages with more conditions and insurance mortgages without the 3rd party default clauses.