What lenders will ask your client's accountant
Most accountants have no idea a lender is about to call them. That is the single biggest cause of a stalled low-doc file — not the letter’s content, but the accountant being caught cold by a verification call in the middle of a busy week.
Fixing it takes one email, sent before the letter goes in.
The three questions the lender will ask
Verification calls are standard practice, not a red flag. Multiple low-doc lenders independently contact the client’s accountant to confirm the declared figure at a high level. The questions are consistent:
- How long have you acted for this client?
- Is the declared income reasonable to service the proposed loan?
- Has the business had recent cash-flow problems?
None of those are difficult. They are only difficult when they arrive unannounced.
Some lenders also independently verify the accountant via a search plus a phone call in the same week the letter is received. Tell the accountant a call is coming and roughly when, and give them the exact figures and the business description used in the application — a mismatch between the letter’s description and the application’s reads as an inconsistency.
Where a live call genuinely cannot be arranged, several lenders accept written confirmation, six months of BAS with a calculator, or six months of business bank statements as a documentary fallback. Ask for the alternative rather than letting the file sit.
What the letter has to contain
- The accountant’s professional body — CPA, CA, IPA or equivalent. Some lenders restrict the accountant-declaration route to particular bodies, and a membership outside the accepted list disqualifies the letter regardless of content. Check first.
- Proper letterhead with ABN and business address. A bare or unbranded letter gets bounced.
- How long the accountant has acted for the client.
- The declared annual income figure, attributed to a specific entity and financial year.
- A statement that the income is reasonable and sustainable.
Three checks to settle before anything is drafted
The financial year
An accountant cannot attest to a figure for a year whose return is already finalised and shows a different number. Specify the current, not-yet-lodged financial year. This is a routine correction and an entirely avoidable one.
The entity
A letter describing the wider family group rather than the specific applicant entity will be flagged by credit. Where a group spans several vehicles, expect a separate letter per entity confirming trading or non-trading status.
Where a director or guarantor is linked to numerous companies and trusts, expect a conditional-approval condition requiring a single consolidated letter that individually names and addresses every related entity — confirming each is trading profitably, not trading with no outstanding liabilities, or a self-funding vehicle not reliant on contributions from the director, shareholder or beneficiary.
Get that consolidated letter proactively. Chased as a post-approval condition it is slow, and it holds up settlement behind it.
Director and shareholder status
Several lenders will only rely on self-employed or company income where the applicant is both a director and a registered shareholder of the entity generating it. Directorship alone is not enough, and this is the most common trigger for a self-employed income rejection. Pull the company extract before the letter is drafted, not after the decline.
Where turnover is below the GST threshold
Below the GST-registration threshold no BAS is lodged and none can be produced. A written accountant’s letter comparing two financial years’ revenue, expenses and profit, explaining any variance above roughly 20%, has been confirmed in writing as an acceptable substitute.
Supply it proactively. Waiting for an assessor to query the missing BAS costs a week for no reason.
Get the number right first
The most common cause of a redrafted letter is a figure that does not clear serviceability.
Standard practice is to calculate the income the loan actually needs first, then take that figure to the accountant for professional sign-off — rather than starting from a stated income and hoping. Two disciplines go with it:
- Confirm the accountant is genuinely comfortable with the number. Reluctance is information about the figure, not an obstacle to route around.
- Sense-check the surrounding picture. One referral was returned for implausibly low declared living expenses, an unexplained personal loan, and declared income of $101,400 against roughly $200,000 actually required. A mismatch found by credit later stalls or kills the deal.
Where a figure is being revised from a previous application to the same lender, walk the accountant through the reason by phone before sending the revised letter — and expect the lender to follow up with them directly to verify the change.
Two things to tell the client
The letter has a shelf life. Treat one already on file as good for roughly six months, and refresh it proactively rather than waiting for a credit analyst to flag it as stale.
Add-backs need written confirmation. Consulting fees, interest and depreciation can be legitimate add-backs, but only with the accountant confirming them in writing — and related-party payments should be flagged upfront, because credit will query them regardless. Unsupported add-backs draw a capacity test, so have the evidence ready at submission.
The email to send
One message, before the letter is drafted, covering: the entity, the financial year, the figure, that a verification call is likely and roughly when, and the three questions they will be asked.
It takes five minutes and it removes the most common cause of delay on the whole file.
General information only, prepared for finance industry professionals. It is not credit assistance, tax advice, financial product advice, or an offer of finance. Requirements vary by lender and are indicative observations over 2024–2026.