Purchasing a home using collateral
Since you only own half of the house, you would most likely need the cooperation of whoever owns the other half in order to use it as collateral for a loan, but if you can do that, there's no reason you couldn't do what you're talking about.  The complication is that if you default on the loan, the bank isn't going to seize half of the house.  They'll repossess the entire house, sell it, and take what they're owed out of the proceeds, leaving you and whoever owns the other 50% to fight over the remnants. Even if the owner of the other half is family, they may be hesitant to risk losing the house if you don't pay your mortgage, so this could be a dicey conversation. What do you see as the advantage of doing this? When you buy a house with a mortgage, the bank gets a lien on the house you are buying, i.e. the house you are buying is the collateral. Why would you need additional or different collateral? As to using the house for your down payment, that would require giving the house to the seller, or selling the house and giving the money to the seller. If the house was 100% yours and you don't have any use for it once you buy the second house, that would be a sensible plan. Indeed that's what most people do when they buy a new house: sell the old one and use the money as down payment on the new one. But in this case, what would happen to the co-owner? Are they going to move to the new house with you? The only viable scenario I see here is that you could get a home equity loan on the first house, and then use that money as the down payment on the second house, and thus perhaps avoid having to pay for mortgage insurance. As DanielAnderson says, the bank would probably require the signature of the co-owner in such a case. If you defaulted on the loan, the bank could then seize the house, sell it, and give the co-owner some share of the money. I sincerely doubt the bank would be interested in an arrangement where if you default, they get half interest in the house but are not allowed to sell it without the co-owner's consent. What would a bank do with half a house? Maybe, possibly they could rent it out, but most banks are not in the rental business. So if you defaulted, the co-owner would get kicked out of the house. I don't know who this co-owner is. Sounds like you'd be putting them in a very awkward position.
Assuming you would still have a line of credit, it makes plenty of sense to pay off the loan. You're paying 16 percent for money you don't need right now. Pay it all off and you can start rebuilding your savings account. So what do you do in a future emergency? Well first off, you can use the savings you have rebuilt up to that point to fund some portion of it. The rest you can borrow again, as long as you have a line of credit somewhere. The icing on the cake though, is that once you stop carrying a balance, your credit card purchases will have grace periods again. Once that grace period kicks in, it's an effective short term free loan, and if you really wanted to, you could move money that would otherwise immediately go to purchases into savings. The difference is that you're paying in full again, and aren't charged any interest on the float. Just remember, that if you fail to pay in full by the due date, they charge retroactive interest and fees. An alternative is to find a way to consolidate your credit card bill into a collateralized loan. HELOCs for example. The rates are much cheaper than your CC bill, but require you to have some equity in the home. One thing to consider is that HELOCs are an open line of credit that can't be easily taken away. The interest is also tax deductible, unlike your credit card interest. There's also unsecured lines of credit from banks and credit unions, and if you have the credit score the can be cheaper than credit cards. I think I've shown here that there's plenty of alternatives to carrying credit card debt for the unexpected in life. Pay it off! Purchase a Netgear router from an authorized dealer if you want to access lag free internet. These are suitable for homes or small businesses and you can easily install it by using routerlogin.net or use the IP address 192.168.1.1. This IP address redirects you to login page of the router. It is in the bank's interest to sell the property for as much as they can (although it is doubtful they will put as much effort/time into selling it as the owner might). They will certainly not sell it for $1. The main reason for this is that the bank would prefer to own $100k, than a loan to them from a customer for $100k. Banks have to discount the value of loans to take into account the likelihood of the loan not being repaid. They classify certain loans as riskier than others, and these are discounted more heavily. An unsecured home loan to a customer that has already defaulted, has no collateral, and now needs to pay rent AND loan repayments would count as an extremely risky loan. Fire insurance, as you have discovered, is a complete ripoff. Most people pay fire insurance all their lives with no benefit whatsoever, and those such as yourself who are lucky enough to get a payout find that it is completely insufficient to replace their loss. I once computed the actual beneficial net present financial value of my fire insurance policy and it came out to $40 per month. The cost was $800 per month. That is typical. Homeowners pay $500 to $800 per year for something that is worth $30 to $50 per year. Ironically banks would actually make more money from mortgages if they did not require mortgagees to buy insurance, but nevertheless they insist on it. It is not about logic, but about fear and irrationality. When I paid off my mortgage and gained ownership of my home the first thing I did was cancel my fire insurance. I now invest the money I would have wasted on insurance, making money instead of losing it. Being compelled to throw money down the toilet on fire insurance is one of the hidden costs of a homeowners mortgage in the United States. In your situation, the main option is to borrow the money to rebuild the house using the land as collateral, if the land is valuable enough. Of course, you still owe the money for your original mortgage on your now (non-existent) home. So, to get a home, you will have to have the income to service two mortgages. A loan officer at a reputable bank can tell you whether you have the income necessary to support two mortgages. If you were maxed out on your original mortgage, then you may not have enough income and you are screwed. In that case you will have to go back to renting and gradually paying off your old mortgage. (If it were me, I would sue the insurance company pro se as a way to get the necessary money to rebuild the home, because insurance companies roll over like a $20 hooker when they get sued. Juries hate insurance companies. But I am unusual in that I love courtrooms and suing people. Most people are terrified of courtrooms though, so it may not be an option for you.) Keep in mind that credit takes time to build.   Your best short-term solution is to save enough cash to put enough of a down-payment that the lower loan-to-value ratio outweighs the lack of credit history.  If there's enough equity to ensure that the bank will get their money back if they have to foreclose, you will have a better chance of securing financing. In addition, the stability and consistency of your employment may also be a factor that makes it difficult for you to get a loan without a substantial down-payment. Finally, don't ignore the risk present in resting a property that you have a loan on.  Make sure you have a plan in place to pay your payments if the other half goes unrented for several months, or you risk losing the entire property. My advice is to rent somewhere else for enough time that you can save up a lot of cash to purchase a duplex rather than getting in a rush and doing something unwise (like apply for a bunch of credit cards you don't need). If an entity or individual has full rights to the land and land improvements, they can hold, transfer, delegate, or dispose of them on their terms.  The only exception may be eminent domain.  If the sovereignty meets the public necessity or public purpose tests they can assume or change the rights to your property in exchange for compensation. As others have said writing your own mortgage falls under the category of seller financing.  A seller can write a mortgage with the help of a loan servicing company.  Some loan service companies report to credit agencies, to help with buyer refinancing at a later point. Other forms of seller financing: Leasing Land contracts mineral contracts  and more... Additionally, the seller can finance the minority of the property, called a junior mortgage.  For example, the Bank finances 79% of the value, the seller finances 11%, and the buyer's 10% down payment covers the rest.  If the buyer defaults, the superior mortgage (bank's) has collection priority. More commonly, the seller can option for a wrap-around mortgage or an 'all-inclusive mortgage'.  The seller holds or refinances the existing mortgage  and provides a junior mortgage in exchange for a secured promissory note and an all-inclusive trust deed.  If the buyer defaults, the seller has foreclosure rights. It is not uncommon for entities or people to use financing strategies other than the traditional mortgage if they are unable to exclude the gain on sale.  Check out section 1031 exchanges.  In almost all cases I would tell people not to make decisions based on tax consequences alone, if your financial objective/goal for seller financing sounds like a 1031 exchange, take exception and carefully consider the tax consequences. tl;dr: I think you can find a much better deal. Doing a strait refi will cost you some amount of money.  However, a 2.5% fee ont top of closing costs seems really high.  You can get a quote from Quicken loans pretty quick and compare their fee.  Also I would check with a local bank, preferably one you already do business with.  The 2.5% is probably their commission for originating the loan.  If you are in the Southeast I have had great luck with Regions bank.  They are large enough, but also small enough.  Please know that I have no affiliation with either company. BTW the rate also seems high.  Doing a quick search of Bank Rate, it seems you can get 3.25% with zero fee as of this writing.  The worse deal they show is 3.46 with a .75% fee, much better than you were quoted. If you can afford it I would also encourage you to think outside the box.  A client of mine was able to obtain a Home Equity Loan (not line of credit) to replace their mortgage.  They went for a 7 year pay off, with the loan in first position, at a rate about .75 below the then current 15 year rate.  The key was there was zero closing costs.  It saved them quite a bit of money. Also look at a 10 year fixed.  It might not be much more than you are paying now. In a prior blog post titled “Learn Why You Would Wholesale Property Using Double Escrows“, we introduced using transactional funding when you plan on wholesaling property using a double escrow.  There are a variety of different sources that offer transactional funding for wholesalers.  You can find them by simply typing into a search engine such as Google, Bing, or Yahoo the keywords “transactional funding companies”.  You will find hundreds of companies offering this service.  You will find that some are more relaible than others.  You will find that some are going to charge an upfront processing fee, some will charge a flat rate, some will charge a points.  It is a matter of doing some research and ask for referrals from other real estate investors at real estate investment clubs.