You're a developer or investor who needs short-term capital to bridge a gap, complete a conversion or secure a plot. You call a lender, the deal sounds good, you submit basic papers - and then silence. Providers who ghost after an initial call are now part of the landscape. Why does it happen, how can you avoid it, and what are the realistic funding routes when timing and certainty matter? This piece takes an unconventional broker's view: treat lender ghosting as a market signal, not as an insult. Use it to sharpen how you approach the market and pick the right finance route for your project.
5 Things That Really Matter When Choosing Short-Term Development Finance
What should you judge first when comparing options? Which things will cost you money or kill your deal? Ask these questions before you pitch:
- How quickly can the lender deliver binding terms? Speed is often the deciding factor. Are they offering a heads of terms in 48 hours or a promise to “get back to you in two weeks”? How reliable is their execution? Do they have repeatable processes, lawyers on retainer and a track record with projects like yours? A lender that has backed out mid-cycle is a red flag. What’s the true cost, not just the headline rate? Look at arrangement fees, monthly interest, exit fees, legal costs, valuation fees, and any penalty for early repayment. Small differences add up on a bridge. Is the exit clear? What happens at month 6 if sales are delayed? Do they convert to longer-term finance or force a sale? How much flexibility and transparency do they offer? Can you draw and repay part of the facility? Will they charge for small changes?
Ask yourself: would you rather pay more to obtain certainty, or save a get more info few points and risk the deal? In contrast to pick-the-cheapest mentality, the right trade-off is often certainty over headline price.
High-Street and Traditional Bridge Lenders: Pros, Cons and the True Costs
Most developers start with the high-street banks or established bridge lenders. They feel safe: regulated, familiar, and sometimes cheaper on paper. But what do you actually get?
Pros
- Lower headline interest for prime borrowers, especially on larger facilities. Regulated entities often give clearer compliance and consumer protection where applicable. For long-term facilities there is greater lender continuity.
Cons
- Speed is often poor. A high-street bridge can take weeks to approve, and banks will stall at valuation or legal stages. Rigid approval criteria. Banks prefer established sponsors, conservative LTVs and strong exit routes - land-led speculative deals struggle. Hidden costs in legal pack, staged releases and prepayment penalties. A deal that looks cheap can carry surprise expenses.
Real example: a conversion in Manchester needed £2m for six months. A high-street underwriting team quoted 5% pa with 1% arrangement fee, but took five weeks to produce terms. The developer missed the purchase window and paid a £40k deposit loss. In contrast, a specialist bridge provided a conditional offer in 72 hours at 10% pa but saved the deal. Which was cheaper in the end?
True cost calculation: a 6-month bank bridge at 5% pa + 1% arrangement = roughly 3.5% + fees, but include legal, valuation and time risk. A specialist at 1% monthly (12% pa) + 2% arrangement may be pricier on paper but provide certainty.
How Specialist Private Debt Funds Differ from Traditional Banks
Private debt funds, specialist bridges and platform lenders are the modern alternative. They have different appetite, speed and fee structures. How do they stack up?
What they offer
- Rapid underwriting and a higher tolerance for complex exits. Flexible structures - interest roll-up, staged draws, and mezzanine tranches. Decision-makers closer to the deal; fewer internal committees.
What you pay for
- Higher monthly rates - often 0.6% to 1.5% per month depending on risk. Arrangement fees of 1% to 3% and exit or performance fees. Heavier up-front due diligence in some cases, with monitoring covenants.
In contrast to banks, private debt funds will underwrite the exit on your project — they’ll accept forward sales, consented refurbishments and development agreements as exit signals. That reduces the chance of ghosting mid-cycle, because they’ve built the team to push deals through. On the other hand, they are more likely to impose aggressive default triggers to protect returns.
Example: a fund advanced £1.5m at 1% monthly with a 2% arrangement fee, 65% LTV on GDV. The lender required missed-interest cover and periodic site inspections. The deal closed in 5 business days. The developer accepted higher cost for a guaranteed completion and a clear rollover route if sales slipped.
Crowdfunding, Joint Ventures and Vendor Finance: When the Unorthodox Works Best
There are viable alternatives outside direct lending. Which is right for you?
Crowdfunding and peer-to-peer
- Good for sub-£3m needs and when you can sell a simple story to retail investors. Speed varies; platforms can be fast but due diligence is public-facing and can derail a late-stage plan. Higher effective cost and obligations to multiple investors; exit and communications can be messy.
Joint ventures and equity partners
- Use when you want to preserve cashflow and can give up some profit share instead of paying high interest. Works well on land deals, longer-term development and when you need hands-on partner expertise. On the other hand, you’re selling control and upside; negotiations over contributions and exit mechanics can be protracted.
Vendor or seller finance
- Best where the seller wants to move the asset quickly or retain tax-deferral benefits. Can be cheap and quick if a seller is motivated. Terms can be bespoke and simple. High dependency on that particular vendor - if they change their mind the whole plan collapses.
Compare options: crowdfunding is similar to specialist lending in speed but less discreet; a JV is an alternative to mezzanine finance but dilutes returns. On the other hand, vendor finance can be the fastest and cheapest but is rare for larger transactions.
Option Typical deal size Speed Cost Certainty High-street bridge £500k–£50m Slow Low–medium Medium Private debt / specialist bridge £100k–£500m Fast Medium–high High Crowdfunding £50k–£5m Medium Medium Low–medium JV / equity £100k–£500m Varies Variable (dilution) High if partner is committed
Choosing the Right Short-Term Funding Strategy for Your Project
How do you decide? Start with honest answers to these questions:
- How soon do I need funds to avoid losing the deal? What is the exact exit within 1-24 months: sale, refinance, forward purchase? What security can I offer and at what realistic LTV? Am I willing to give up equity or accept higher interest for speed? What’s the operational burden of multiple investors or a JV partner?
From a broker's perspective, the decision tree is simple: if you need speed and certainty, accept specialist lenders and higher cost. If you need lower cost and can wait, banks are fine. If you are open to sharing upside, a JV or equity piece might be smarter long-term.
Practical checklist before you market the deal
Prepare a concise data room: title docs, planning, budgets, contractor tenders, exit evidence (offers or forward sale). Can you send a pack in one link? Be ready to answer the LTV question and show stress tests for delayed exit. Decide on minimum acceptable terms: maximum rate, maximum fee, maximum dilution. Identify non-negotiables for you: control over sales, ability to refinance, no step-in rights beyond default. Consider paying a small retainer or exclusivity fee for serious lenders to prevent casual shoppers from wasting time.Would you rather waste time with five lenders who ghost, or pay a modest fee to shorten the list to two reputable providers who will give you a commitment? Many developers waste months on free bids; the market rewards those who show seriousness.
How to Avoid Being Ghosted — Practical Tactics
Ghosting is not just rudeness - it is often a symptom of poor process. Here are tactics I've used to stop it happening:
- Ask for a binding heads of terms with an expiry date. It creates accountability. Request a clear milestones schedule from the lender: valuation, legal, drawdown. Put dates on it. Choose lenders with repeat execution on projects like yours. Ask for names of similar deals. Limit the number of lenders you approach. Quality beats quantity. In contrast to shotgun approaches, a focused approach reduces confusion and speed-bleed. Use a broker with a track record and skin in the game. A straight-talking broker will call the underwriter if they go quiet.
What about upfront non-refundable fees? They deter casual lenders and incentivise delivery. Would you pay a small fee to get certainty? If the deal size is large, the answer is often yes.
Summary - How to Stop Being Ghosted and Get Your Deal Funded
Ghosting is avoidable. Treat it as a signal to sharpen your process. Prioritise certainty over the lowest headline rate. Prepare your data room, shortlist lenders that have executed similar deals and demand binding heads of terms with deadlines. Be honest about your exit and ready to pay a price for speed if necessary.
Quick checklist to act on now:
- Decide your maximum acceptable cost and your non-negotiables. Prepare a one-link data room with all core documents. Shortlist 2–4 lenders: mix one bank, one specialist fund and one JV/crowd option if useful. Ask each for an executable heads of terms within 48–72 hours and set a deadline. Consider a small exclusivity fee to lock serious lenders in and avoid ghosting.
Final question: if you were buying the same project, would you choose certainty with a slightly higher cost, or save a few points and risk the sale? For most developers, the right answer is clear. Money is a tool; preserving the deal is what really protects your return.
If you’d like, describe your project in broad terms and I’ll sketch which routes are realistic for your deal size and timing: fast bridge, private debt, JV or a mix. What’s the amount, the exit and the timescale?