# True North Mortgage Co. - Anyone familiar with them?



## thompsg4416 (Aug 18, 2010)

I'm looking to purchase a new home in the next few months and I've been watching ratehub.ca and True North Mortgage Co. seems to have the lowest rates available - even better then what my broker can get. I've "googled" them and read their wiki entry but I still don't really know much about them. Anyone here have any experience with them? They are offering a 5 year fixed at 3.28 with a 120 day rate hold. That's .3 points better then any of the big banks. 

FYI I'll be buying in Ottawa.

Thoughts?


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Good rate. I live in Ottawa, True North founded out of Calgary I recall... 

http://www.truenorthmortgage.ca/company.html

I've heard of them.

You might want to ensure you can get some pre-payments with that?


----------



## dougbos (Jun 4, 2012)

thompsg4416 said:


> I'm looking to purchase a new home in the next few months and I've been watching ratehub.ca and True North Mortgage Co. seems to have the lowest rates available - even better then what my broker can get. I've "googled" them and read their wiki entry but I still don't really know much about them. Anyone here have any experience with them? They are offering a 5 year fixed at 3.28 with a 120 day rate hold. That's .3 points better then any of the big banks.
> 
> FYI I'll be buying in Ottawa.
> 
> Thoughts?


True North is a brokerage firm using licensed mortgage agents. A mortgage agent is similar to an insurance agent where they are not bound to one firm but search through 30-50 different lenders to find the best rate and mortgage for you. They are the same as Dominion Lending, MI, MA, etc

3.28 is good as long as the 120 day hold is true. Our firm can offer 3.29 but it has to close within 30 days.

There are some important considerations for you to look at and questions to ask.

1) If you want to be able to make yearly lump sum payments and/or increase your monthly payment what is the limit. Bare bone mortgages with lower rates may be only 5% while the standard amounts are usually 15/15% or 20/20%.

2) What are the early cancellation fees if you sell or need to refinance before the term is up? Most mortgages have an interest rate differential or 3 month interest penalty. Some cut rate mortgages will make you pay back a certain amount of money to pay for the amount that it was originally reducedplus the interest.

3) You did not mention the amount your downpayment will be. Less than 20% it is CMHC insured and rates can be lower than a conventional mortgage (20% down). However there are a couple of lenders that if your down payment is more than 20% but less than 25% you will pay insurance. In short, before you sign on the dotted line make sure that you have researched all its terms and conditions first.


----------



## Addy (Mar 12, 2010)

dougbos said:


> In short, before you sign on the dotted line make sure that you have researched all its terms and conditions first.


Best advice to give when it come to answering the question what is the best mortgage for me. We are a military family and move often, so I have to know more than simply the rate to determine what mortgage is best for us. I have learned a lot, and still have a lot to learn I imagine, about mortgages. Some of my husbands coworkers choose not to educate themselves and continually get "screwed" (although it's their own fault!) when they move.


----------



## Pluto (Sep 12, 2013)

Pay a visit to a local mortgage broker. Generally they get the best rates and are not necessarily advertised. Don't lock in, get a variable rate mortgage. don't buy this theory that if you lock in, you are safe. If you lock in, generally they are safer because you pay them more.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Good point Pluto. I've always considered the fixed rate premium over variable rate as insurance. As the mortgage gets lower, even if you don't intend to move, you might not need the insurance.


----------



## thompsg4416 (Aug 18, 2010)

Thanks for all the info everyone. I will have a DP of around 50% - depending on what we purchase a bit more a bit less. Bottom line CHMC isn't a concern for me.

I just checked back today and true north is now offering 5 year fixed at 3.19 with a 20% monthly and 20% lump sum payment option. Only a 90 day hold now. 

With regards to variable vs fixed - my last 2 mortgages(5 year var and 1 year var) have been variable and I've made out like a bandit. HOwever the lowest 5 year var I can find right now is 2.4 which also happens to be TN. Question with the US economy finally starting to pick up steam where do I see interest rates 5 years from now?? Who can say but I do think they'll rise more then .8 points. 

With that spread I'll take the certainty of the fixed rate.

I'm still a few months out and as they say "The devil is in the details". I'll definitely be doing my due diligence before I sign on the dotted line. My biggest concern at the moment is trying to understand and get a grip on this company.


----------



## Siwash (Sep 1, 2013)

Why go with a fixed rate? Variable has constantly beaten fixed… lots of research done on this too… Variable set by BoC. That rate anoint going anywhere… Fixed rate determined by the bond mkt.. Those will go up..even if you lock in, why pay 33% for your mortgage? U can get variables for 2.3


----------



## Siwash (Sep 1, 2013)

thompsg4416 said:


> Thanks for all the info everyone. I will have a DP of around 50% - depending on what we purchase a bit more a bit less. Bottom line CHMC isn't a concern for me.
> 
> I just checked back today and true north is now offering 5 year fixed at 3.19 with a 20% monthly and 20% lump sum payment option. Only a 90 day hold now.
> 
> ...


BTW, you can lock in a variable… so your point is moot… if you start to see a rise in variable (not for a long time), then u can lock in thereby taking advantage of the cheaper rate for many years.. I doubt you'll have to lock in anyway…. 

Good luck with your decision


----------



## thompsg4416 (Aug 18, 2010)

Variables beat fixed when rates are going down, stay flat or have a very large spread. Over the last few years this has been the case. As I mentioned I've had a variable myself over the last 6 years.

Over the next year rates will not likely rise or at least not much - I'm confident in that. Maybe a quarter point. Do you expect rates to stay flat over a 5 year period? The spread right now between variable and fixed as far as I can see is only .79. 

If rates were to stay flat over a 5 year period I'd lose about 7500 on a 200k mortgage by going fixed over variable.


----------



## thompsg4416 (Aug 18, 2010)

Siwash said:


> BTW, you can lock in a variable… so your point is moot… if you start to see a rise in variable (not for a long time), then u can lock in thereby taking advantage of the cheaper rate for many years.. I doubt you'll have to lock in anyway….
> 
> Good luck with your decision


Unless there is a product I don't know about by the time the variables rise the fixed rates will have also risen to beyond what they originally were. It comes down to where rates will be in a few years.

Rates will go up from where they are now. If I had to bet some money that wasn't mine the variable will probably come out slightly ahead in the next 5 but not by much adn there is a chance in this case to lose money. 2-3 years ago when the world economy was in the toilet you had a lot more certainty where rates would be in a couple years.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

You can always divide the mortgage into different buckets, eg 1/3 in variable, 1/3 in 3 yr, and 1/3 in 5 yr. Both my children do it as sharply increasing rates would be a burden on them. Its all about risk. The only other thing to remember is that rates go up and rates go down and we are currently at the "low". Higher rates will come but the question is "when"?


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

I have to renew mortgage at the end of 2015. Likely for another 3-5 years. Hopefully rates will remain low.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...on-to-persist-well-into-2016/article16444689/

If they hover where they are now, I will likely go variable.


----------



## davejmortgage (Jan 20, 2014)

*True North & other reputable brokerages have access to special rates*



thompsg4416 said:


> Variables beat fixed when rates are going down, stay flat or have a very large spread. Over the last few years this has been the case. As I mentioned I've had a variable myself over the last 6 years.
> 
> Over the next year rates will not likely rise or at least not much - I'm confident in that. Maybe a quarter point. Do you expect rates to stay flat over a 5 year period? The spread right now between variable and fixed as far as I can see is only .79.
> 
> If rates were to stay flat over a 5 year period I'd lose about 7500 on a 200k mortgage by going fixed over variable.



In answer to your original inquiry. True North is a licensed mortgage brokerage. Most reputable mortgage brokerages have access to special rate offers from most major financial institutions , as well as, various other "A" lenders. Most have very competitive prepayment and lump sum privileges as well. At current, based on approval variable rates for a 5yr term start at 2.35 - 2.45% OAC (on approved credit). If you would like further information, please feel free to message me, I myself am with Northwood Mortgage Ltd. a very reputable brokerage in Ontario.


----------



## MRT (Apr 8, 2013)

davejmortgage said:


> ...


just a quick FYI that soliciting and advertising of products/services is not permitted on the forum.


----------



## Quotealex (Aug 1, 2010)

Siwash said:


> Why go with a fixed rate? Variable has constantly beaten fixed… lots of research done on this too… Variable set by BoC. That rate anoint going anywhere… Fixed rate determined by the bond mkt.. Those will go up..even if you lock in, why pay 33% for your mortgage? U can get variables for 2.3


The fix rate for a 2-year term I got recently was lower than the variable the bank was offering....


----------



## chantl01 (Mar 17, 2011)

Quotealex said:


> The fix rate for a 2-year term I got recently was lower than the variable the bank was offering....


That was my case also - even last May, when I renewed my mortgage. The 2-year fixed mortgage was 0.4% below what I could get on a variable at the time. My rate is still quite competitive with the current variable offerings, so no regrets here despite the fact I'm usually a die-hard variable rate believer.


----------



## Daniel123 (May 4, 2015)

*experience with other company*

I have heard about the company that you have mentioned but haven't worked with them. It's the Aspire FCU ( http://www.aspirefcu.org/loans/mortgages/ ) in New Jersey that I contacted for mortgage. They offered a very decent rate. Between, 3.28 is quite a good rate I think.


----------



## CharlesF.Donahue (Jan 7, 2015)

I heard of True North by searching around on the Internet and I read many good reviews so I decided to give it a try. I wasn't expecting much before the first meeting but I was honestly thoroughly impressed. The employees have good knowledge and interpersonal skills. I knew this was the best as the samwinter..


----------



## raymond07 (May 13, 2015)

*true north*

True North is pretty legit. They are probably one of the best mortgage brokers with multiple offices throughout Canada... Also look up Dominion Mortgages they are pretty good too, but definitely True North is one of the best.


----------



## OurBigFatWallet (Jan 20, 2014)

thompsg4416 said:


> I'm looking to purchase a new home in the next few months and I've been watching ratehub.ca and True North Mortgage Co. seems to have the lowest rates available - even better then what my broker can get. I've "googled" them and read their wiki entry but I still don't really know much about them. Anyone here have any experience with them? They are offering a 5 year fixed at 3.28 with a 120 day rate hold. That's .3 points better then any of the big banks.
> 
> FYI I'll be buying in Ottawa.
> 
> Thoughts?


I used True North Mortgage for my first mortgage. Decent service. One word of caution though with the super low rates, they almost always come with a ton of restrictions (which the agents at True North will explain). True North usually has two rates, a normal rate and a limited rate (with lots of restrictions). It may work out best for you to get the lower rate but always worth checking out the fine print


----------



## Kail (Feb 7, 2012)

We just bought our first home in Newmarket and used True North. The biggest PITA is providing all the account documentation showing where the down payment is coming from but that would be the case anywhere we went.

Through True North we ended up going with MCAP on a 5 year variable at 2.00% (P-.85). It is closed but we can convert to fixed if we want. 20 / 20 prepayment options as well. Other than that, not really any restrictions outside of your standard mortgage as far as I am aware.

The best part about buying the house (bought in Feb, closing isn't until July)? Similar houses with less upgrades (it's an older house) are selling for 15-20k above what we paid  I hate to say it, but the wife was right and I'm glad we won't be renting anymore, though I will miss our view.


----------



## indexxx (Oct 31, 2011)

By all means, do it! I own stock...:biggrin:


----------



## dandyrough (May 30, 2015)

*no such thing as a mortgage*



Kail said:


> We just bought our first home in Newmarket and used True North. The biggest PITA is providing all the account documentation showing where the down payment is coming from but that would be the case anywhere we went.
> 
> Through True North we ended up going with MCAP on a 5 year variable at 2.00% (P-.85). It is closed but we can convert to fixed if we want. 20 / 20 prepayment options as well. Other than that, not really any restrictions outside of your standard mortgage as far as I am aware.
> 
> The best part about buying the house (bought in Feb, closing isn't until July)? Similar houses with less upgrades (it's an older house) are selling for 15-20k above what we paid  I hate to say it, but the wife was right and I'm glad we won't be renting anymore, though I will miss our view.


It's about time people stopped acting upon assumptions and instead did a little reading of the "mortgage" documents they sign.
Let's get one thing straight. No one can own property in Canada, the Crown or Queen owns the lot. The proof of this is simple - try getting allodial title to your land. It is not possible, you CANNOT own land in Canada. So if you cannot own it, then what is your relationship to the land you think you are buying? the answer is TENANT. You never did buy any property, what you bought was the sellers interest in the property - not the property itself.
Here is a thought, if you are a tenant, not owner, how can you be foreclosed on? You can't. The tenant cannot be punished for the actions of the owner. Here is another thought, If the bank cannot give you a mortgage on the property, how can they foreclose on the owner (not you)?
Answer - They cannot, they never gave you a mortgage on the property in the firstplace.
Read the documents, and stop living in willing ignorance. The transfer form and the lands title registry all state that the person who thought they were a buyer is in actual fact a tenant
www.detaxcanada.org/repub2.htm gives you an insight into this.
www.virconnect.com/bankfraud explains it in some detail


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

dandyrough said:


> It's about time people stopped acting upon assumptions and instead did a little reading of the "mortgage" documents they sign.
> Let's get one thing straight. No one can own property in Canada, the Crown or Queen owns the lot. The proof of this is simple - try getting allodial title to your land. It is not possible, you CANNOT own land in Canada. So if you cannot own it, then what is your relationship to the land you think you are buying? the answer is TENANT. You never did buy any property, what you bought was the sellers interest in the property - not the property itself.
> Here is a thought, if you are a tenant, not owner, how can you be foreclosed on? You can't. The tenant cannot be punished for the actions of the owner. Here is another thought, If the bank cannot give you a mortgage on the property, how can they foreclose on the owner (not you)?
> Answer - They cannot, they never gave you a mortgage on the property in the firstplace.
> ...


So what's your point? We shouldn't buy anymore based on your discovery and interpretation?


----------



## dandyrough (May 30, 2015)

Mortgage u/w said:


> So what's your point? We shouldn't buy anymore based on your discovery and interpretation?


Did you read what you just wrote? You cannot buy property the most you can do is buy the sellers interest in it. it's not a discovery, plenty of people know about the transfer form scam and what interpretation are you talking about? I made no point, If you think I was trying to make a point, please enlighten me as to what the point was.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

dandyrough said:


> Did you read what you just wrote? You cannot buy property the most you can do is buy the sellers interest in it. it's not a discovery, plenty of people know about the transfer form scam and what interpretation are you talking about? I made no point, If you think I was trying to make a point, please enlighten me as to what the point was.


just trying to understand why you needed to mention what you mentioned. How does it affect the way people buy property - sorry, 'sellers interest'? Call it what you want but I think people will continue to 'buy property' and obtain a 'mortgage' to attain it regardless the information you brought forward.


----------



## dandyrough (May 30, 2015)

Mortgage u/w said:


> just trying to understand why you needed to mention what you mentioned. How does it affect the way people buy property - sorry, 'sellers interest'? Call it what you want but I think people will continue to 'buy property' and obtain a 'mortgage' to attain it regardless the information you brought forward.


I think that most people would prefer to know what the situation was rather than be conned into parting with their money by what amounts to a dishonest transaction.
If you were told up front that you could never own the property, that at the most you would be a tenant, you had never actually bought the property but you were risking losing all your money if you could not pay the loan, then maybe you would want a different structure to the deal. 
I suspect you know the workings of the mortgage system in Canada, but for other readers, let me lay it out. The bank does not lend money, it creates credit, the "mortgage" is sold almost immediately so the bank is not at risk, CMHC bundles the mortgage and sells it, so they are not at risk, the buyer of the mortgages is guaranteed never to lose their money, so the only person at risk is the poor guy who thinks he is buying property.
If the particulars of the transaction were laid out honestly, then at least the buyer would know what a cesspit they are getting into. Maybe one day Canadians will wake up and demand that Queenie hand over all her land to the people. If there is any reason why the people of this country should not hold allodial title to their land, I have not found it. Now is your chance to enlighten me.


----------



## MRT (Apr 8, 2013)

dandyrough...I think the questions are how your distinction is relevant to the day-to-day of the real estate and mortgage lending industries, and how the individual homeowner is impacted.

You can throw around loaded terms like 'dishonest transaction' all you want...but the reality is that allodial title is not available anywhere, and so your rant is rather misleading and arguably irrelevant. You are asking for something THAT DOES NOT EXIST in modern society and, barring a widespread revolution (lol), is not going to change. 

Do tell though...what meaningful difference does any of this make? How is anyone being 'conned' when they buy a home and sign mortgage documents? Let's say that everyone was given crystal clear instructions about all that you have said...what exactly will change? 

Why should anyone else be at risk when YOU buy a house and sign mortgage documents? 

I just don't see where you are going with this...what exactly do you want to see happen and how realistic are your desires?


----------



## dandyrough (May 30, 2015)

MRT said:


> dandyrough...I think the questions are how your distinction is relevant to the day-to-day of the real estate and mortgage lending industries, and how the individual homeowner is impacted.
> 
> You can throw around loaded terms like 'dishonest transaction' all you want...but the reality is that allodial title is not available anywhere, and so your rant is rather misleading and arguably irrelevant. You are asking for something THAT DOES NOT EXIST in modern society and, barring a widespread revolution (lol), is not going to change.
> 
> ...


Please don't call it a rant, the term reminds me of Hitler. Allodial title is all over the place, the Crown or Queen has allodial title to Canada. It was obtained by war and theft. What I want is transparency in the the whole transaction, even though you must know there is no such thing as a mortgage, you keep throwing the word around. On the website: www.virconnect.com/bankfraud every page in a “mortgage” contract is explained. I have never seen anyone contradict what is being said about the process. The fact that a signed mortgage contract can be sold as a security conceals the fact that it was the buyer who created the security, not the bank, the bank can sell the security to CMHC even before they “lend” money to the buyer.

This risk you talk about, who is at risk of anything in the lending chain?. Certainly not the bank, maybe the ultimate buyer of the security ?. Why shouldn't they take a risk? All other shares in corporations and even governments in the world are at risk so why not them?. Maybe that would make an investor a little more wary. We will be buying some mortgage backed securities in the near future, as far as I can see, they cannot be beat, thanks all you home “buyers”. If it was explained to the potential buyer they will be creating a security that the bank sells, that the property can be taken away from them at any time under a multiple of reasons, that there is no such thing as clear title, that at no time does the bank lend their own money, in fact they are using the money you create but want you to pay them back with interest then I think the whole structure of what is now called a mortgage will be replaced by something else. 
An admission by the government (your servants) that in reality you can only buy a bundle of privileges to use the property for as long as you pay rent to the owner may change the way people view real estate. I don't think a lot would change, people may think that those privileges were worth having but they would know exactly what their risks and benefits were. On top of that the banks would have to change the way they present themselves as “lenders”.
I hope this does not sound like a Rant, I am far too old for that sort of action, all that arm waving and shouting could put me on my deathbed.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

dandyrough said:


> I think that most people would prefer to know what the situation was rather than be conned into parting with their money by what amounts to a dishonest transaction.
> If you were told up front that you could never own the property, that at the most you would be a tenant, you had never actually bought the property but you were risking losing all your money if you could not pay the loan, then maybe you would want a different structure to the deal.
> I suspect you know the workings of the mortgage system in Canada, but for other readers, let me lay it out. The bank does not lend money, it creates credit, the "mortgage" is sold almost immediately so the bank is not at risk, CMHC bundles the mortgage and sells it, so they are not at risk, the buyer of the mortgages is guaranteed never to lose their money, so the only person at risk is the poor guy who thinks he is buying property.
> If the particulars of the transaction were laid out honestly, then at least the buyer would know what a cesspit they are getting into. Maybe one day Canadians will wake up and demand that Queenie hand over all her land to the people. If there is any reason why the people of this country should not hold allodial title to their land, I have not found it. Now is your chance to enlighten me.


Its all great the information you provided. Sorry to break it to you but it won't change anything. I don't think many people will really care. Its not like we have options. Just as MRT mentioned, "you are asking for something that does not exist".

Do you only purchase things that you can physically own and take with you? I assume that you don't own a house (or in your terms, "tenant of the Queen"). You don't own a car either cause the road you drive on doesn't belong to you. If you financed it, it belongs to the bank. You definitely do not own stocks - that's definitely not yours. By all means, I am not trying to insult you so please do not get offended - I'm just trying to enhance my point that the mortgage industry and method we 'own' property has always been this way and will not change.


----------



## dandyrough (May 30, 2015)

Mortgage u/w said:


> Its all great the information you provided. Sorry to break it to you but it won't change anything. I don't think many people will really care. Its not like we have options. Just as MRT mentioned, "you are asking for something that does not exist".
> 
> Do you only purchase things that you can physically own and take with you? I assume that you don't own a house (or in your terms, "tenant of the Queen"). You don't own a car either cause the road you drive on doesn't belong to you. If you financed it, it belongs to the bank. You definitely do not own stocks - that's definitely not yours. By all means, I am not trying to insult you so please do not get offended - I'm just trying to enhance my point that the mortgage industry and method we 'own' property has always been this way and will not change.


Change never comes invited into the living room. it usually sneaks up from the cellar. I don't care if I don't bring about change, but if I can light a small fire of doubt in any of your readers minds that will be good enough for me. Change will come, it is the nature of life.


----------

