FIFO Worker Borrowed $120,000 More Than His Bank Would Offer

Marcus is a FIFO supervisor working a 2-weeks-on, 1-week-off roster on a mine site in the Pilbara. His gross income is approximately $180,000 per year — made up of a base salary, a site allowance, and fly-in fly-out travel entitlements.

When he applied directly through his bank for a home loan, they offered him $640,000.

He knew that wasn’t right. His income was strong, his credit was clean, and he’d been in the same role for four years. He came to us.

The Problem: How Banks Assess FIFO Income

FIFO income looks straightforward on paper — but lenders assess it very differently depending on their internal policy.

The issue for Marcus was his site allowance: a significant component of his total income that compensated him for working remotely. His bank was applying a 50% shading to the allowance — meaning they only counted half of it when calculating his borrowing capacity.

Their logic: site allowances can end if the project ends or if the worker transfers to a different site. They treated it as potentially non-recurring income.

At 50% inclusion, Marcus’s assessed income dropped to roughly $150,000. At that level, $640,000 is a reasonable figure.

But Marcus had four years of consistent payslips showing the full allowance, an employment letter confirming his ongoing role, and a realistic expectation that his income would continue. The bank’s conservative policy was costing him $120,000 in borrowing power.

What We Did

Not all lenders apply the same shading rules to site allowances. Some lenders — particularly those with significant exposure to WA’s mining sector — have more favourable policies around FIFO income assessment.

We identified a lender that would accept 100% of documented site allowances provided:

• The allowance was supported by 12 months of payslips
• The employer confirmed the ongoing nature of the role in writing
• The allowance was a consistent part of the employment package

Marcus had all of this. We prepared the application carefully — payslips, employer letter, contract summary — and presented it to that lender.

At 100% allowance inclusion, his assessed income was close to his actual gross, and the numbers worked comfortably for a $760,000 loan.

The Result

Bank’s offer	$640,000
Matrix Finance approval	$760,000
Difference	$120,000
Property purchased	Rockingham
Settlement	While Marcus was on swing (via electronic signing)

The extra $120,000 in borrowing capacity let Marcus buy the home he actually wanted for his family — rather than compromising down to fit his bank’s conservative assessment.

We handled the entire application remotely. Marcus signed everything electronically during one of his weeks off swing. He didn’t need to set foot in a branch.

What FIFO Buyers Should Know

Your income is often assessed more conservatively than it should be. Allowances, overtime and roster-based pay are treated differently by different lenders. The difference can easily be $100,000 or more in borrowing capacity.

Lender selection matters more for FIFO than for most other borrowers. The right lender for a FIFO worker is rarely your everyday bank. A broker who knows the WA mining income landscape can make a significant difference.

You don’t need to be home to buy. Electronic signing, digital document submission, and remote communication mean the home loan process doesn’t require you to interrupt your roster. We’ve handled dozens of FIFO settlements without the client being in Perth.

Start early. Pre-approval before you start looking gives you a clear budget and means you can act quickly when the right property comes up — even if you’re on site when it does.

---

Names and some details changed for privacy. Outcomes reflect this client’s specific income and employment situation.