A typical facility funds a percentage of the site purchase (commonly 60% to 70%) plus up to 100% of the build costs, with the total facility capped at 60% to 70% of GDV — the value of the completed scheme. Interest rolls up rather than being serviced monthly, and the whole facility — advance, rolled interest and fees — is repaid from sale or refinance of the finished units.
Build funds are not advanced upfront. They are drawn in arrears against stages certified by the lender's monitoring surveyor (MS), who inspects the site at each drawdown request. The MS relationship matters: drawdowns flow smoothly when the build is documented properly, and stall when it is not. We prepare clients for the monitoring regime before the first brick.
First-time developers can secure funding with the right project structure, realistic borrowing and strong professional support.
Funding is available for well-planned first developments.
Experienced contractors and project managers build lender confidence.
Construction-related skills can strengthen your application.
Office-to-residential and other commercial conversions — including those under permitted development rights — are a substantial part of the current development market. Lenders like conversions for their shorter programmes and reduced groundwork risk, but scrutinise the specific issues: structural surveys on the existing frame, services capacity, and the planning condition trail on PD schemes.
Conversion appraisals turn on the purchase price of the existing building relative to its converted value. We see strong conversion opportunities regularly through our auction finance work, where commercial buildings with conversion potential frequently surface below market value.
Development facilities end at practical completion plus a marketing period — the exit must be real before that clock runs out. Selling the units is the classic exit; refinancing onto a term product and retaining them is the growing alternative, particularly for developers building rental portfolios. Development-exit bridging exists as a middle product: cheaper than the development facility, it refinances the completed scheme and buys an extended sales period.
For develop-to-rent clients, we arrange the term refinance — BTL, HMO or multi-unit block lending — in parallel with the development facility, so the exit is underwritten before the project starts. The whole capital stack is mapped from site purchase to stabilised rental asset.
Development money is priced in layers: interest (often quoted annually, 7% to 12%+ depending on leverage and risk), arrangement fees of 1% to 2%, exit fees of 1% to 2% — sometimes charged on GDV rather than the loan, a difference worth thousands — plus monitoring surveyor fees per drawdown and legal costs. Two quotes with identical headline rates can differ materially once the fee bases are compared.
We model every quote on a like-for-like total-cost basis across the realistic project timeline, including a delayed scenario, before recommending. The cheapest facility for a twelve-month project is frequently not the cheapest if month eighteen arrives.
Typical structures fund 60% to 70% of the site purchase and up to 100% of build costs, capped at 60% to 70% of the gross development value. Your equity goes in first — usually into the land — and the lender funds the build in arrears through staged drawdowns. Stronger experience and conservative appraisals push leverage up; first schemes sit toward the lower end.
For the development facility itself, yes — lenders fund consented schemes. Sites without planning are funded through land bridging on conditional or speculative terms, refinancing into development finance once consent is granted. We arrange both stages where clients are buying ahead of planning.
Yes — with structure compensating for track record: modest leverage, a fixed-price contract with an established builder, professional team appointed, and a scheme of sensible scale. Relevant professional background — construction, surveying, project management, trades — materially strengthens a first application, and we present it as the asset it is.
You fund each stage of works, then request a drawdown; the lender’s monitoring surveyor inspects, certifies the value of work done, and the lender releases funds against it. The rhythm is typically monthly. Clean documentation — invoices, valuations, build programme — keeps drawdowns flowing; gaps in it are the most common cause of mid-project cash flow stress.
Scale and structure. A refurbishment bridge suits cosmetic-to-moderate works within an existing building, advanced largely upfront with perhaps one works release. Development finance suits structural change and ground-up construction, sized on GDV with formal staged drawdowns and monitoring. The boundary cases — heavy refurbs, small conversions — can be financed either way, and pricing decides.
Engage early. Options include a term extension, a development-exit bridge at lower pricing to fund a longer marketing period, or refinancing onto BTL/portfolio lending and renting the units. The poor outcome — fire-selling into a deadline — is almost always avoidable with early action, which is why we stay involved through to repayment, not just drawdown.