Treadstone Associates
Case File № 210 · Rental & Investment

No year-round lease

qualifying a seasonal Vancouver Island cottage rental in Duncan

A five-month booking season with no signed annual lease meant the cottage's carrying costs and its rental income had to be reconciled through an offset, not a flat add-back. Moving the file to an offset lender took TDS from 66.7% to 42.7%.

British ColumbiaUninsured · 75% LTVFiled August 7, 20265 min read
66.7%

TDS under a partial add-back with the full carrying cost still a liability — declined

42.7%

TDS once the rental is offset against the cottage's own carrying costs

5 months

Actual booking season — no signed year-round lease exists

Anonymized illustration. The borrowers, dollar figures, and rates in this file are an illustrative composite — no real client is identifiable, and any rate shown is illustrative, not a quote. The rules are real: every regulatory figure is cited to its source in the Sources section, and the math computes exactly as shown.

№ 01

The client

A T4 employee earning $6,500/mo, already carrying a $1,900/mo mortgage on a principal residence, buying a $480,000 recreational cottage near Duncan on Vancouver Island at 25% down. The plan was to rent it out on short-term bookings through a five-month peak season — a common structure given how tight Canadian rental vacancy has been, but with no signed annual lease to hand a lender.

Applicant

T4 employee

$6,500/mo income

Existing residence

$1,900/mo mortgage payment

$280/mo tax, $120/mo heat

New purchase

$480,000 recreational cottage, Duncan

Property tax $210/mo

Down payment

$120,000 — 25%

Uninsured, 75% LTV

Booking revenue

$28,000/yr

Five-month season, no signed annual lease

Off-season carrying cost

$90/mo utilities estimate

Lender-standard winterization figure

The cottage's own carrying costs against its seasonal rental income:

Cottage (rental)Monthly
Mortgage payment (qualifying rate)$2,510
Property tax$210
Off-season utilities/winterization estimate$90
Total carrying costs$2,810
Annualized rental income ($28,000 ÷ 12)$2,333
№ 02

The problem

With no signed annual lease — only a five-month booking season worth $28,000 a year — one lender's policy was to add just 50% of the annualized rental income to personal income while still charging the cottage's full carrying costs as a straight liability in TDS.

The partial-add-back arithmetic

  • Income used: $6,500 + $1,166 (50% of the $2,333 annualized rent) = $7,666/mo.
  • Liabilities: $1,900 + $280 + $120 (own home) + $2,810 (cottage's full carrying costs) = $5,110/mo.
  • TDS: $5,110 ÷ $7,666 = 66.7%. Declined.

The shape of the damage is familiar from any add-back treatment: the rent adds only half its value to income, while the cottage's entire $2,810 carrying cost lands in the liability column — even though the actual seasonal rent covers most of it. Without a signed lease to point to, the file had no obvious argument for a gentler treatment.

№ 03

The numbers

At 25% down (75% LTV) this is a conventional/uninsured purchase — no default-insurance premium, and no CMHC ratio ceiling on the file.

The uninsured purchaseAmount
Purchase price$480,000
Down payment (25%)−$120,000
Base mortgage (75% LTV, no default-insurance premium)$360,000
Rate & paymentsFigure
Contract rate — 5-year fixed (illustrative, not a quote)4.95%
Minimum qualifying rate — contract + 2%6.95%
Monthly P&I at the qualifying rate — the ratios run on this$2,510
Monthly P&I at the contract rate — what he actually pays$2,084

TDS — partial add-back versus a full offset

TDS lineLender A — 50% add-backLender B — full offset
Own-home liabilities (payment + tax + heat)$2,300$2,300
Cottage treatment$2,810 (full carrying costs, liability)$477 (shortfall: $2,810 − $2,333 rent)
Income used$7,666 (incl. 50% of rent)$6,500 (no rent added)
TDS vs. an informal 44% comfort line66.7%  ✗42.7%  ✓

Under the offset, the rent is netted against the cottage's own costs before anything reaches the ratios, the same offset treatment compared against add-back and net-income methods for ordinary rentals — only the $477 shortfall lands in liabilities, and the file swings from a clear decline to a comfortable pass. Because the file is uninsured this is measured against an informal comfort line, not a CMHC ceiling.

№ 04

The solution

A BCFSA-licensed submortgage broker re-shopped the file around the missing lease rather than accepting the first lender's treatment as the only option.

First, confirmed the booking revenue with real documentation. A booking-platform history and a comparable-property market-rent opinion supported the $28,000 annual figure even without a signed year-round lease.

Second, matched the file to a lender whose seasonal-property policy offsets the rental against the property's own carrying costs first, rather than adding a discounted share of the rent to personal income while still charging the property's full cost as a liability — the same distinction covered in rental offset.

Third, packaged the off-season cost estimate realistically, using a winterization/utilities figure rather than a full year-round heating cost, since the cottage sits largely dormant outside its five-month season.

Booking-platform revenue history for the current and prior season
Comparable-property market-rent opinion
Existing principal-residence mortgage statement, tax bill and insurance
Purchase agreement and listing for the cottage
Letter of employment confirming salary and tenure
90-day down payment history
№ 05

The outcome & the closing math

Approved and funded uninsured at 75% LTV, 25-year amortization, 5-year fixed term.

Cash due at closing (beyond the down payment)Amount
BC Property Transfer Tax on $480,000 — 1% on the first $200,000, 2% on the remainder$7,600
Legal fees, title insurance & adjustmentsvaries

Because this is a second, non-owner-occupied property purchased at 25% down, there is no default-insurance premium to plan for — the closing cash is limited to the transfer tax and standard legal costs.

№ 06

What to take from this file

  • 01No signed annual lease does not mean no usable rental income — a booking history and a market-rent opinion can support a seasonal property's income just as a lease supports a year-round one.
  • 02An offset treatment and a partial add-back treatment can move the same file by more than 20 TDS points. Run both before choosing where to submit.
  • 03Off-season carrying costs on a seasonal property are lower than a year-round estimate — use a winterization/utilities figure, not a full heating estimate, for the months it sits dormant.
  • 04A second property's own carrying costs and income need to be assessed on top of, not instead of, the applicant's existing housing obligations. Both stayed in every TDS calculation here.

Sources

Every regulatory figure in this file traces to one of these primary sources. Client details and anything that varies by lender are illustrative, as flagged below.

Illustrative in this file — lender-specific, not rules:

  • 4.95% contract rate — rates move daily; not a quote.
  • 50% pre-lease rent add-back / full offset — each lender sets its own policy for a seasonal rental without a signed year-round lease.
  • the $28,000 annual booking-revenue figure — a booking-platform history and market-rent opinion for a seasonal property, not a signed lease amount.

Authority & provenance

How this case file was built

We publish the origin, the verification method and the reviewer for every case file, so you can judge how far to trust it before you rely on it with a client.

Where it comes from

Derived from files handled by Treadstone’s fulfillment desk and from scenarios contributed by partner brokerages. Names, employers, exact amounts and dates are changed so no client or file is identifiable.

Provenance: Composite — a pattern seen repeatedly on fulfilled files, not a single transaction.

What is verified

Every regulatory figure traces to a primary source listed above and was checked against it on the date shown. The arithmetic is recomputed by machine on every rebuild.

Anything that varies by lender is labelled illustrative rather than stated as a rule.

Who reviewed it

Reviewed for Canadian regulatory accuracy before publication, and re-checked whenever a cited rule changes.

Reviewed by: Nicholas Parson, Treadstone Associates — reviews every case file before publication.

First published 7 August 2026Rules last verified 7 August 2026Next scheduled review 7 February 2027

This case file is professional reference material for licensed mortgage professionals. It is not advice to a borrower, and it is not a lender commitment. Insurer rules, qualifying rates and provincial taxes change — confirm the current position with the insurer, regulator or lender before you rely on any figure here in a live file.

Treadstone fulfillment

Files like this are daily work for our desk.

Document collection, ratio math under multiple treatments, lender placement notes, and submission-ready packaging — for Canadian mortgage brokers who would rather be in front of clients.