Twelve months ago, a borrower seeking six times their income to buy a home had five lenders to choose from. Today that number is 20. The quadrupling of lenders willing to stretch to six times loan-to-income represents one of the most meaningful shifts in mortgage accessibility since post-financial crisis rules were tightened over a decade ago.
The catalyst wasn’t a sudden change of heart from banks. It was a regulatory adjustment by the Bank of England’s Financial Policy Committee, which relaxed how the high loan-to-income flow limit applied to individual lenders. The cap itself, designed to prevent a return to reckless lending, hasn’t changed. But the way it’s distributed across the market has, and lenders moved quickly.
Data from Mortgage Broker Tools (MBT) shows that 18 lenders increased their maximum LTI multiple following the FPC’s adjustment. The names that crossed the six times threshold in the past year include Barclays, NatWest, HSBC, Nationwide and Leeds Building Society.
These aren’t niche or specialist lenders. They’re the high street institutions that process the bulk of UK mortgages. Their collective entry into six times lending sends a clear signal: the affordability boundaries that once made high-income borrowing a preserve of smaller lenders have materially loosened.
The numbers tell a story of shifting demand. The average LTI sought by borrowers has risen from 3.8 times to four times income. The proportion of cases requesting five times salary or above climbed from 11% to 15%.
More striking is the jump in what lenders will actually offer. The average maximum loan available through MBT’s platform rose from £270,000 to £330,000. That £60,000 increase represents genuine purchasing power, enough to move a buyer from a two-bedroom terrace to a three-bedroom semi in many parts of Norfolk.
The proportion of cases where no affordable or eligible lender could be found dropped from 14% to 9%. Fewer borrowers are hitting a wall.
Before the champagne comes out, there’s a significant caveat. For borrowers specifically seeking six times income, 61% still can’t find an eligible lender. That’s down sharply from 86% a year ago, but it means the majority of those who need the highest multiples continue to be turned away.
Tanya Toumadj, managing director of MBT, put it plainly: “What we’re seeing is the market starting to reflect reality: borrowers genuinely need to borrow more, and more lenders are willing to meet them there. But ‘more lenders offer six times’ does not mean six times is available to every borrower.”
Eligibility varies enormously by income level, loan-to-value ratio, employment type and credit profile. A single earner on £45,000 won’t access the same terms as a dual-income household on £120,000, even from the same lender. Conditions apply, and they differ at every door.
In the East of England, where average house prices sit above the national figure, the expansion of high-LTI lending could prove particularly meaningful. A borrower on £55,000 previously limited to 4.5 times income could access £247,500. At six times, that figure rises to £330,000, opening up a different tier of property entirely.
In Norwich, £330,000 buys a solid three-bedroom family home in established suburbs. In Wymondham or Attleborough, it stretches further. For first-time buyers who’ve watched the deposit ladder grow taller with each passing year, the extra borrowing capacity could make the difference between renting and owning.
The Ivybridge Collection’s property market reports cover 324 locations across the region, providing the granular pricing data that helps buyers understand exactly what their borrowing power translates to on a specific street or in a particular village.
The obvious question is whether six times income is prudent. The FPC’s flow limit remains in place, capping the proportion of any lender’s book that can sit at elevated LTI multiples. The safeguard hasn’t been removed; it’s been recalibrated to reflect a market where wages haven’t kept pace with house prices.
There’s a reasonable argument that the old distribution was too rigid. If a lender maintains a strong credit book with low arrears, restricting its ability to offer competitive terms to higher-income borrowers serves no obvious prudential purpose.
The counter-argument is that higher multiples increase vulnerability to rate shocks. With mortgage rates currently ticking upward as swap costs respond to geopolitical turbulence, a borrower stretched to six times income has far less breathing room if monthly payments rise further.
This isn’t a cyclical blip. The FPC’s adjustment has structurally widened the lending landscape, and major lenders aren’t going to retreat from territory they’ve only just entered. For buyers in Norfolk and Suffolk, the practical impact is real: more borrowing options, stronger competition between lenders, and a higher ceiling on what’s achievable.
Whether that ceiling should be tested is a decision every buyer needs to weigh carefully. The lenders have opened the door. Walking through it wisely requires understanding both the opportunity and the exposure that comes with it.
