Why TAB's Iver bridge shows brokers the value of backup exits
TAB has completed a £611,250 first-charge bridging loan built around two separate, pre-agreed exit routes, allowing the facility to proceed at 75% loan-to-value in a market where average bridging LTVs have been compressing. The structure offers brokers a working template for cases where a client's plans hinge on a planning outcome that has not yet been decided.
The 12-month facility, arranged by specialist broker AXK Finance, funded a portfolio investor's £815,000 purchase of a three-bedroom detached chalet bungalow in Iver, Buckinghamshire. Pricing was set at 0.8125% a month, and underwriting was carried out by TAB's Waheeb Husaini.
The bungalow is vacant and needs modernisation. The borrower's preferred route is planning permission for a two-storey extension adding three bedrooms, supported by a Decision in Principle that values the scheme at a gross development value of £960,000. That would fund a net day-one loan of £539,000 plus a further £50,000 towards the works, leaving a gap of roughly £70,000 that the borrower can cover from company reserves.
Crucially, TAB did not make the loan contingent on planning being granted. A valuer confirmed the property is already lettable, and if permission is refused, the fallback is a cosmetic refurbishment costing £30,000 to £50,000 — a new kitchen and bathroom, redecoration and flooring — backed by a separate Decision in Principle from a buy-to-let lender for a £615,000 gross loan at 75% LTV. Two documented, independently viable exits sat behind the facility from day one, rather than a single plan resting on the local authority's decision.
Sophie Meller, senior BDM for London at TAB, said the case stood out for having options on the table from the start: "With an experienced property investor acquiring an asset with several potential routes forward, this was a strong case for bridging finance. The borrower had a clear understanding of the property, the plans and the available exit strategies, which gave us confidence in the transaction."
She added that the property's readiness for letting eased timing pressure on the works: "The condition of the property also meant that the borrower was not dependent on completing the works before securing a refinance exit. There was a straightforward buy-to-let refinance route based on the existing property value, alongside the planning and extension option."
Gena Karaj, founder of AXK Finance, said the 75% LTV terms gave the borrower room to decide later whether to pursue the extension: "TAB understood the borrower's experience, existing portfolio and the different options available for the property. The ability to proceed on a 75% LTV basis allowed the purchase to complete while leaving the borrower with flexibility over whether to pursue the extension and refurbishment works." She called the process smooth: "TAB provided a professional and efficient service throughout the process. Communication was clear, the team were responsive and Sophie, in particular, was very helpful. TAB's pragmatic approach helped keep the transaction moving, bringing momentum to lending."
The terms look more notable set against the wider bridging market. BDLA data covering the first quarter of 2026 showed completions falling to £1.8 billion from £2.5 billion the previous quarter, with average LTVs across the market compressing to 56.64% as lenders turned more cautious. A 75% LTV facility on a vacant property earmarked for extension sits well above that average — and the two-exit structure behind it looks like the reason the higher gearing was available.
TAB has been building out its distribution around cases like this one, having joined the TMA Mortgage Club panel in June to widen intermediary access to its commercial and bridging range. For brokers weighing up which specialist lenders will stretch to higher LTVs on complex residential deals, this case shows the level of exit documentation now expected in return.
The takeaway for advisers packaging similar cases: when a client's plans depend on a planning outcome, presenting a lender with a second, planning-independent exit — evidenced by its own Decision in Principle, not just described in a covering letter — can be the difference between a standard offer and one that stretches further on LTV.
Want to be regularly updated with mortgage news and features? Get exclusive interviews, breaking news, and industry events in your inbox – subscribe to our FREE daily newsletter. You can also follow us on Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and LinkedIn.
