Cannot get a mortgage because I work through a recruiter
To a mortgage lender, it appears that you have a temporary contract (perhaps extending for nine more months) with a agency that supplies workers to companies that need temporary help. You have been placed currently with a company and are making good money, but that job might disappear soon and then you will have no income while your recruiter tries to find you another assignment. How will you make your mortgage payments then? The recruiter agency's contract with your current company probably has clauses to the effect that the company agrees to not offer you a permanent job unless it pays a head-hunter's fee to the recruiter agency.  Your contract with the recruiter agency also likely has clauses to the effect that if the company where you have been placed offers you a permanent job,  you  must pay the recruiter company a fee (typically one or two months  of salary) to the recruiter agency as compensation for releasing you  from your current contract (unless the company hiring you pays the head-hunter's fee).  This is why the company where you are working right now wants to wait until after your contract with the recruiter company ends before making you an offer of permanent employment. Be aware that sometimes such clauses extend out to three months after the ending date of your contract with the recruiter company. As far as the condo is concerned, unless there is a specific one that you absolutely must have because it has an ocean view or other desirable properties, you may well find that another condo in the same complex is available some months from now.  If you are lucky, it may well have an acceptable ocean view. If you are even luckier, it may be the condo that you absolutely must have which has remained unsold all that time -- as you said, the economy is crappy -- and you will be able to buy it for a lower price from an owner getting desperate to make a sale. To answer your question: is there any way around this? My recommendation is to simply wait out the end of your recruiter agency contract and get a permanent job with the company where you have been placed.  Then there are no issues. If not, get your company to make a written offer of a  permanent job starting nine months from now and hope that this (together with your current employment) impresses your bank into lending you money. This might not work, though.  In the early 1970s, one of my friends was offered a job at a large aerospace company which lost a major contract in the interim period between offer and joining. My friend showed up for work on the day he was supposed to start, and instead of being processed through HR etc, his job was terminated on the spot, he was paid one day's salary, and shown the door.  Times were crappy then too. If this does not work, get your company to offer you a permanent job right away, pay off the recruiter  company yourself, and then go to the bank. As a follow-up, I was able to find a bank that gave me a loan. I just called several banks listed on Yelp, and one ended up working with me. It is also possible that the previous banks misunderstood me and assumed I was 1099 and not W2. I made it very clear to this guy that I was W2, and there was absolutely no problem. Also, it turned out the recruiter I work for has special paperwork their employees can give to lenders to verify W2 employment. So, I have been in my condo since January. And, the condo was a little under $250K. Anyway, I still think it's ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS that banks would not give a loan to a web developer who is in super high demand and making well over 100K/year -- even if I am 1099. I have never, ever in my life been late on a single payment for anything, and I have an 800 credit score. To even question that I could not make payments is ludicrous. Whenever I put my resume on monster.com (just one web site), I receive about 20 phone calls daily -- and I am not exaggerating even slightly. They are looking at your work history to see that you have maintained a similar level of income for a period of time, and that you have a reasonable expectation to continue that for the foreseeable future. They are looking to make a commitment for 15-30 years. They see the short term contract, and have no confidence in making a guess to your ability to pay. Before the real estate bubble burst, you would have had a chance with a no documentation loan. These were setup for people who earned fluctuating incomes, mostly due to being commissioned based. They were easily abused, and lenders have gotten away from them becasue they were burned too often. Just like building your credit rating over time, and your down payment over time, you might have to wait to build a work history. I think you are running into multiple problems here: All these together look like a high risk to a bank, especially right now with companies being reluctant to hire full-time employees. Looking at it from their perspective, the last thing they need right now is another potential foreclosure on their books. BTW, if it is a consolation, I had to prove 2 years of continuous employment (used to be a freelancer) before the local credit union would consider giving me a mortgage. We missed out on a couple of good deals because of that, too. Some options: See if the seller will sell to you on Contract.  With a significant down payment the seller may be willing to sell you the condo on contract.  This fill in the year or so you will probably need to go from contractor to full time employee with enough time on the job to get a mortgage.   Keep Shopping.  Be up front with the lenders with the problems you are running into and see if any of them can find you a solution.  You may need to take a higher rate in the short term but hopefully you can refinance in a few years to a more reasonable rate. Check with a local bank or credit union.  Many times local banks or CU's will finance high demand properties that may be out of favor with the super banks that have no ties to your community.  These banks sometimes realize that just because the standard spreadsheet says this is a bad risk the reality is the specific property you are interested in is not the risk that it appears on paper.  You will have to find a bank that actually retains its mortgages as many local banks have become agents that just sell mortgages to the mortgage market. Talk to a Realtor.  If you are not using one now it may be time to engage one.  They can help you navigate these bumps and steer you towards lenders that are more amenable to the loan you need.
I think you have just explained why it impossible for me to find a job. I have the skill set that matches the job description and hardly ever get asked for an interview. Do you have any further information about how widespread this practice may be. What size organizations does it affect? "I've had a mortgage changing hands with mid size companies for many years with no problems.  I've handled many complex financial and technical transactions with multiple parties with no problems over the course decades. Then, after my last refinance, my mortgage fell into the hands of JP Morgan Chase. The bank sent one letter to let me know of the transfer, and in the next week they sent my loan to collections for what I later found to be Chase's process error in the transfer.   For the next three months, I ended up in customer service hell as one Chase group threatened to foreclose on my house while another group told me to ignore the imminent foreclosure notices. One started to ""investigate"" the transfer while the collections group tried to make me pay my mortgage payment twice.  The mess only ended up being taken care of after I tracked down the old owner of my loan and had them refund the ""lost"" payment directly to me - normally they would have sent it to the company buying the loan, but could not get Chase to accept the payment. Then I paid Chase that exact same mortgage payment.    All the time the Chase internal investigations and collections department were completely incapable of a simple call to previous holder of the loan. A company handling millions of mortgage transactions is somehow incapable of handling a minor glitch in a mortgage transfer? It's either utter incompetence or total malice in picking up extra penalty fees or maybe an occasional forclosure if homeowners didn't say on top of the details. This is what we used our collective tax dollars to bail out." "Let me summarize your question for you: ""I do not have the down payment that the lender requires for a mortgage. How can I still acquire the mortgage?"" Short answer: Find another lender or find more cash. Don't overly complicate the scenario. The correct answer is that the lender is free to do what they want. They deem it too risky to lend you $1.1M against this $1.8M property, unless they have $700k up front. You want their money, so you must accept their terms. If other lenders have the same outlook, consider that you cannot afford this house. Find a cheaper house." "First off you are either lying or are seriously disillusioned about the recruiting process because it is very common knowledge that trading puts significantly less emphasis on GPA that IBanking. .  Secondly, why are you making the assumption that there was nothing exemplary on their resume? Having a low GPA doesn't automatically imply that the person's resume is trash.   And again, if ""no one"" got past the initial round of interviews because of a 3.2 GPA I know quite a few firms who would be out some very good traders." This sounds very like disguised employment. You act like an employee of the company, but your official relationship with them is as a contractor. You gain none of the protection you get from being an employee, and this may make you cheaper, less risky and more desirable for the company who is hiring you.  Depending on your country you may also pay corporation tax rather than income tax, which may represent a very significant saving. Also, the company hiring you may not have to pay PAYE, national insurance, stakeholder pension, etc. This arrangement is normal and legal providing you genuinely are acting as a subcontractor. However if you are behaving as an employee (desk at the company, company email, have to work specific hours in a specific location, no ability to subcontract, etc.) you may be classified as a disguised employee. In the UK it used to be common practice for highly paid employees to set up shell companies to avoid tax. This will now get you into hot water. Google IR35 It sounds like your relationship in this case is directly with the recruiter. You will have to consider if the recruiter is acting as your employer, or if you remain a genuinely independent agent. The duration of your contract with the recruiter will have a bearing on this. In the UK there are a whole series of tests for disguised employment. This is a good arrangement provided you go in with your eyes open and an awareness of the legislation.  However you should absolutely check the rules that apply in your country before entering into this agreement. You could potentially be stung very badly indeed. This is pretty normal.   I am in the UK and currently doing the exact same thing.  As some answers state there is additional tax law called IR35. But thats all it is, an additional tax law that may be applicable to your situation (it very well may not). It is all perfectly legal and common (all my university friends now do it). You will be the director of a company, and invoice the recruiters company.  This has benefits and disadvantages. Personally I love it, but each to their own. Don't do it if you don't want to. In a process called collateralization, your mortgage is combined with others to form a security that other can invest in. When done right, this process provides liquidity, more money to be lent for more loans. When done wrong, bad things happen.  My mortgage happens to be held by the issuing bank. Yours was sold into such a pool of mortgages. One effect of this is the reselling of the servicing of the loan. I've had other mortgages that were sold every year, but I never paid ahead. With this bank, I'm on my fifth refinance, but the bank keeps the loan in house no matter what. I don't know if there's any correlation, it depends on the originating bank, in my opinion. A bank can reject a loan if they feel you do not meet the eligibility criteria.  You can talk to few banks and find out. Marketing strategy by far was and continues to be the biggest problem.  Choosing and setting up things like corporate entity, billing, data backup, calendars were a distant second problem.  Labor law is too confusing for me to hire anyone but independent contractors. I worked at Wells Fargo Home Mortgage right before all the ARM loan stuff hit the news. Everyone on the board was constantly talking about increasing their portfolios.  One of the main ways they aimed to do this was by creating new loan products aimed at non-traditional borrowers (read: people who didn't meet the requirements for their traditional loan products). We had quarterly company-wide meetings to inform us about this kind of thing and it never really seemed like a great plan to me. Two years later, and the banks started failing. The most likely reason for this is that the relocation company wants to have a guaranteed sale so as to get a new mortgage in the new location.  Understand that the relocation company generally works for a prospective employer.  So they are trying to make the process as painless as possible for the homeowner (who is probably getting hired as a professional, either a manager or someone like an engineer or accountant).   If the sale is guaranteed to go through regardless of any problems, then it is easy for them to arrange a new mortgage.  In fact, they may bridge the gap by securing the initial financing and making the downpayment, then use the payout from the house you are buying to buy out their position.  That puts them on the hook for a bunch of money (a downpayment on a house) while they're waiting on the house you're purchasing to close.   This does not necessarily mean that there is anything wrong with the house.  The relocation company would only know about something wrong if the owner had disclosed it.  They don't really care about the house they're selling.  Their job is to make the transition easy.  With a relocation company, it is more likely that they are simply in a hurry and want to avoid a busted purchase.  If this sale fails to go through for any reason, they have to start over.  That could make the employment change fall through.   This is a variation of a no contingencies sale.  Sellers like no contingencies sales because they are easier.  Buyers dislike them because their protections are weaker.  But some buyers will offer them because they get better prices that way.  In particular, house flippers will do this frequently so as to get the house for less money than they might otherwise pay.  This is better than a pure no contingencies sale, as they are agreeing to the repairs.   This is a reasonable excuse to not proceed with the transaction.  If this makes you so uncomfortable that you'd rather continue looking, that's fine.  However, it also gives you a bit of leverage, as it means that they are motivated to close this transaction quickly.  You can consider any of the following:   Or you can do some combination of those or something else entirely that makes you fell more secure.  If you do decide to move forward with any version of this provision, get a real estate lawyer to draft the agreement.  Also, insist on disclosure of any previous failed sales and the reason for the failure before signing the agreement.  The lawyer can make that request in such a way as to get a truthful response.   And again, in case you missed it when I said this earlier.  You can say no and simply refuse to move forward with such a provision.  You may not get the house, but you'll save a certain amount of worry.  If you do move forward, you should be sure that you are getting a good deal.  They're asking for special provisions; they should bear the cost of that.  Either your current deal is already good (and it may be) or you should make them adjust until it is. Start with the bank where you have your checking and savings account. They can streamline some of the paperwork, because they can see how much you make, and have access to several years worth of bank statement. Legitimate mortgage companies do publish their rates. But there is no guarantee that you will qualify for the best rate without them knowing your credit score, salary, and down payment information.  There is no way to know that you have the best rate because of the time lag involved. You will pick the best one you can work with, but the rates can change every day.  Even when you lock in the rates, other companies can drift lower. Once you have started down the application process you will reach a point where switching companies will cost you time and money. Once you decide to purchase a house, the contract usually only gives you a few weeks to prove that you have financing in place. Therefore you will have to start the process before deciding on the house. Some advance work is needed to give you an idea of the maximum monthly payment you can afford, which will then based on the rate and down payment determine the maximum house you can buy. I have had good luck with my credit union, but there is no guarantee that yours will be competitive. Keep in mind that while rates are very important, some people also value customer service, and also like that the mortgage won't be sold to out of town investors. This may only apply to Canada, but I would ask if the mortgages they lend are non-transferable. Meaning if you decide in year 2 of your 5 year term that you want to sell and move you pay a penalty, rather than be able to transfer the mortgage to a new house. If I were in your shoes (I would be extremely happy), here's what I would do: Get on a detailed budget, if you aren't doing one already. (I read the comments and you seemed unsure about certain things.)  Once you know where your money is going, you can do a much better job of saving it. Retirement Savings: Contribute up to the employer match on the 401(k)s, if it's greater than the 5% you are already contributing. Open a Roth IRA account for each of you and make the max contribution (around $5k each).  I would also suggest finding a financial adviser (w/ the heart of a teacher) to recommend/direct your mutual fund investing in those Roth IRAs and in your regular mutual fund investments. Emergency Fund With the $85k savings, take it down to a six month emergency fund.  To calculate your emergency fund, look at what your necessary expenses are for a month, then multiply it by six.  You could place that six month emergency fund in ING Direct as littleadv suggested.  That's where we have our emergency funds and long term savings.  This is a bare-minimum type budget, and is based on something like losing your job - in which case, you don't need to go to starbucks 5 times a week (I don't know if you do or not, but that is an easy example for me to use).  You should have something left over, unless your basic expenses are above $7083/mo. Non-retirement Investing: Whatever is left over from the $85k, start investing with it. (I suggest you look into mutual funds) it.  Some may say buy stocks, but individual stocks are very risky and you could lose your shirt if you don't know what you're doing.  Mutual funds typically are comprised of many stocks, and you earn based on their collective performance. You have done very well, and I'm very excited for you. Child's College Savings: If you guys decide to expand your family with a child, you'll want to fund what's typically called a 529 plan to fund his or her college education.  The money grows tax free and is only taxed when used for non-education expenses.  You would fund this for the max contribution each year as well (currently $2k; but that could change depending on how the Bush Tax cuts are handled at the end of this year). Other resources to check out: The Total Money Makeover by Dave Ramsey and the Dave Ramsey Show podcast. "I think that the general public is conditioned to think more in terms of points rather than percentages, so that 200 points is easier to fathom than the equivalent percent. We all translate internally what this means. Of course it is less precise, but it also makes for good copy in the publishing industry (""Market Down 1000 points!"")"