Comparing a 3.30% Jakarta mortgage once fees are included

H

horizon.clever

First-time buyer
After an 84-day process, I received a 3.30% quote with a 15-year fixed period for a Jakarta property priced around IDR 4,727,000,000. The advertised rate initially looked better, but the arrangement fees and applicable loan-to-value tier changed the result.

I’m deciding whether the lower headline rate is actually worth taking. What comparison would you rely on: APR, interest over the fixed period, or total cash cost including fees? I’m also trying to understand portability and early-repayment terms, because either could matter if plans change. The headline rate wins; total cash cost does not.
 
The difficult constraint is choosing a comparison horizon when your plans may change. I’d run the Jakarta quote twice: once to the likely sale or refinance point, and again through the full 15 years.

For each version, include upfront charges, fees added to the loan, interest, the remaining balance and any early-repayment cost. Then test a case where refinancing is unavailable rather than assuming an easy exit. Keep monthly affordability as a separate check, since a lower overall cost does not help if the payment is too tight.
 
What is the full loan term, and does the 15-year fixed period cover all of it or is there a reset afterward? Also, what loan amount sits behind the IDR 4,727,000,000 purchase price? Without the actual LTV and a clear fee breakdown, APR versus total cost is hard to interpret.
 
One more point: don’t assume refinancing makes a weaker quote acceptable. Run one version where you refinance when planned and another where you cannot, or where doing so costs more than expected. The second version exposes the rate-reset risk and shows whether the current deal only works under an optimistic exit assumption.
 
I partly disagree with using only the expected holding period. If two offers are close, flexibility may be worth paying for. A restrictive early-repayment term could dominate the savings if you sell early. Portability sounds helpful, but I would not assign it much value until the lender explains when it applies and whether a future property and loan would still need approval.
 
Thanks—this confirms that I need two comparisons rather than one. I’ll request an itemised breakdown, confirm whether each fee is paid upfront or included in the borrowing, and ask for repayment figures at several possible exit dates. I’ll also get the reset position and portability conditions in writing before deciding. The 84-day timeline makes me reluctant to restart, but that alone is not a good reason to accept the more expensive structure.
 
A simple spreadsheet should settle it: identical loan amount, identical comparison dates, monthly payments, upfront cash, remaining balance at each exit date, and any early-repayment cost the lender confirms. Add a no-refinance scenario as well. For anything unclear in the Indonesian documents—especially how APR and penalties are defined—ask the lender to explain the calculation rather than relying on the headline figure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top