Traditional underwriting rarely suits high-net-worth clients, so how can brokers close the growing gap?
As high-net-worth clients pursue ever more ambitious property goals, mortgage brokers often find themselves facing rigid underwriting rules that don’t reflect the financial reality of these borrowers. Amar Dhanota, co-founder of London FS, works with clients whose income structures, property types, and expectations frequently fall outside standard lending frameworks.
Income structures that don't fit the mould
“Typically, it's income," Dhanota said. "The way income is structured often doesn’t fit standard lender criteria. I’ve had clients tell me they are asset rich but have a low income – this can be for various reasons from tax to not requiring the money and they’ve been told they can’t get the lending.”
For many high-net-worth individuals, wealth is not neatly recorded through regular payslips or salary structures. That misalignment with standard affordability models remains a consistent sticking point.
"When you're looking at standard high street lenders, it’s very rare that high net worth cases will fit neatly into that box," she said.
To work around this, Dhanota said she leans heavily on her understanding of underwriting logic and her longstanding relationships with lenders. “Even if a case doesn’t present well on paper, packaging the case correctly and to the right lender can make all the difference for a successful outcome”.
While she still tries to make deals work with mainstream lenders, tightening criteria have made that increasingly difficult. “Mainstream lenders are quite rigid,” Dhanota said. "So, if the high street won’t take it, we turn to specialist high-net-worth private banks or specialist lenders.”
Generally, Dhanota finds clients are not overly rate driven when their income or case is complex and specialist lenders have funds to deploy, providing a win-win scenario if the client and lender are a good fit.
Making the case to underwriters
Clear, structured case notes are central to Dhanota’s approach. They serve not just as summaries, but as advocacy tools designed to support the case and the underwriter’s perspective.
"Case notes are key," she said. "I provide all the requested documents, but also a detailed case note that explains the client’s background, the rationale for the deal, and what I’ve looked at. That helps underwriters make a common-sense decision."
Without that, she warned, a deal may be declined on technicalities alone – and reversing that decision can be tricky. "If you don’t provide one, and the deal is declined, going back with a case note can feel like a challenge to their decision."
Due diligence on the property side
Beyond income, the nature of the property itself can often cause delays or rejections. Dhanota pointed to lenders' reliance on valuers when assessing non-standard homes.
"That line ‘subject to valuer’s comments’ is frustrating," she said. "It’s vague, and it leaves the client in limbo. So I do as much due diligence in the background as I can. I’ll try and get our surveyor contacts to review the property ahead of time."
She noted that things have improved since the peak of EWS1-related issues, particularly in central London, but the "quirkier" the property, the more proactive brokers need to be.
A call for pragmatism amid change
Dhanota believes the broader shift away from relationship-led lending has made broking more challenging. "Common sense needs to come back into it. We need more of that pre-Reg, manual-underwriting mindset."
The disappearance of dedicated account managers has eroded the human element that once helped borderline cases succeed, she added. "Account managers knew us, knew our businesses. If something didn’t quite fit, they’d advocate internally. That’s harder now."
In a lending environment defined by box-ticking and digital processes, complex clients still require nuance and narrative. For brokers, the challenge is not just knowing where to place a deal, but how to frame it.
"You’re basically saying to a lender, 'This is why I think you should lend to this client,'" Dhanota said. "That can still make the difference, even now."
