Just a simple letter clearly stating your intention will do.
If you have any lawyer which you want to appoint to handle the discharge matter, just let them know. Else, they may let you to select the lawyer (or they decide it for you) to do the necessary.

Bank C should use the actual monthly repayments of your loan from Bank B as basis for its calculation (though for Bank B it may use 10 yrs as basis of calculation for DSR but with actual 30 year loan tenure).

No prob. Wish you luck.

If the intent of your question is to calculate / estimate the interest to be paid during the construction period, it would be around 3% to 5% as a rough gauge.

Tell them that you have the every rights to choose the panel solicitor that you prefer and you can't be penalised for that as in the first place they never seek your prior consent to engage the service of the current solicitor.

For illustration, assuming that you borrow RM500k full flexi @ 4.50% for 30 years so monthly instalment is RM2533.43. If from day 1 you park RM500k into the account, the bank will charge you no interest from day 1. With the monthly deduction of RM2533.43 from your RM500k, it will take you (RM500k /RM2533.43) ÷ 12 = 16 year 5 months to fully settle the loan without a single cent of interest being charged. So, by putting the money in the account it does help to shorten the loan tenure effectively - but of course this is just for illustration purpose and if you do have RM500k in hand, you can always fully settle your loan at any time as it's just a matter whether doing so will incur penalty or not (due to log in period). Whether you want to dump the money in to save interest is a question of how much you can yield from the funds if you invest in somewhere else. So, if you are confident that you can consistently earn above the loan interest (4.50% per annum in this example), then perhaps it is advisable to let the funds make good money for you somewhere.

If there is no extra money being parked into account, of the 1st instalment of RM2533.43, RM658.43 is for principal payment whereas RM1875 is the payment for interest portion. The portion for principal payment will be increasing while portion for interest will be reducing throughout the tenure as the loan being amortised. So, if from day 1 there is no interest element, the whole instalment will be used for principal repayment, which explains the reason why the loan is effectively fully repaid earlier than expected.

This post has been edited by Jasoncat: Jun 4 2015, 03:59 PM

It isis not impossible to have only one name for the loan while the SPA has 2 names but I reckon that most banks have didiscouraged such practice.

It's only good for purchasers not the bank.
It's common that the bank will try to tie up all the purchasers to show their commitments towards the property purchased. In the event of default, the bank can chase after all the borrowers instead of only one borrowers.

Not unexpected as this is not sth really favoured by the bank.

Correct, MRTA doesn't really address the concern of third party loan ie default by the borrower which is still alive.

Yes, the bank should have the rights to do the foreclosure and auction on the charged property. Legally the non borrower (B in your example) has no obligation owing to the bank and the bank cannot take action against him / her. If the proceeds from the auction cannot recover the loan and all the fees incurred, the bank cannot chase after B.

The best solution for the bank is to get the money back with prompt repayment and not through the hassle of foreclosure/legal suit.

3rd party here in this context means SPA names diff from borrowers - it doesn't really mean a party which has no blood / spouse in relation.

Totally no borrowings is not entirely a good thing. At least with a credit card (the simplest / easiest form of borrowings) the bank still can assess the repayment records.

Honestly, sometimes I just find that without a credit card is quite inconvenent. No offence but just wonder how your gf can adapt to it

Based on the info furnished it's quite difficult if not unlikely to get the loan approved. One way to improve the chance of approval is to get another joint borrower who has satisfactory financial standing to the extent that it alone may get the loan approved.

Sorry to say that I disagree that "no monthly charges except full flexi". It really depends on the product features of the bank. Even semi-flexi or full flexi, each bank may have diff treatment/ charges.

This post has been edited by Jasoncat: Jun 18 2015, 09:34 PM

One of the reasons why I raised it is because I personally hold one flexi loan account which has no monthly charges (and other incidental charges / fee). So it's incorrect to draw conclusion "no monthly charges except full flexi".

Bank products have keep on changing its features, fees & charges due to stiff competition. I will never dare to say with 100% certainty that certain product feature is commonly shared by all the banks unless it is a regulatory requirement.

I suggest that you check with your banker. It could be either the principal has already been repaid by the extra funds or principal remain the same as per your loan amortisation schedule but interest is calculated based on the remaining principal less the advanced payments.

Yes, I share the same view.