Of the 38,000 to 45,000 active bridge charges currently registered against UK property holding companies, roughly 5,500 to 7,500 sit against the development-exit and refurbishment-bridge specialists. The category is small relative to BTL bridge but disproportionately important because:
- Average loan size is materially higher (£500,000 to £10m range).
- Overdue rates are the highest of any lender category (30 to 40% over 24 months).
- Exit-bridge refinance economics are well-defined and competitive.
The structural pattern is simple. A developer takes a 18 to 24 month development bridge. Build runs over (planning, materials, sub-contractor availability, weather, all of the usual). At the original term-end, the property is at practical completion or close to it but not yet sold. The developer needs 6 to 12 more months to market and sell. The original lender will extend, but on materially worse terms. The cheaper move is to refinance to an exit-bridge.
The exit-bridge product, in one paragraph
An exit-bridge is a 6 to 12 month facility that takes out an over-running development bridge. The borrower's underlying property is at or near practical completion, the loan is sized at a discount to GDV, the take-out is sale of the developed units. Specialist exit-bridge lenders typically price 150 to 350 bps below the extension rate the original development lender would charge. That spread is the commercial wedge an exit-bridge originator captures.
Identifying developer-exit prospects in the charge register
Three signal stacks reliably identify developer-exit refinance candidates:
- Development charge age 18+ months + no recent sale filing. The borrower has not yet sold any units; project is still mid-cycle but the bridge clock is running out.
- Development charge age 24+ months + recent (last 90 days) charge satisfaction on a sister SPV. The borrower or developer group has just completed and sold another project; the existing SPV is the next in line for exit.
- Development charge age 24+ months + multiple project addresses in close geography. Indicates a developer with multiple concurrent projects, typically more sophisticated and more responsive to refinance approaches.
The three stacks together narrow the 5,500 to 7,500 universe to roughly 1,400 to 2,000 high-conviction exit-bridge prospects at any given moment. That is a quarter's worth of pipeline for a specialist exit-bridge originator working a national patch.
Regional concentration of the stalled-developer cohort
Development-bridge volume in the UK is concentrated geographically. The overdue cohort is more concentrated still.
| Region | Share of stalled-development charges | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Greater London | 24 to 28% | Multi-unit residential and conversions; planning delays the dominant cause. |
| South East | 20 to 23% | Residential schemes in the commuter belt. Sales-rate slowdown 2024 to 2026 a major contributor. |
| North West | 12 to 15% | Manchester city-centre conversions and Liverpool waterfront. Build cost overruns the dominant cause. |
| West Midlands | 8 to 10% | Birmingham residential and mixed-use. |
| Other regions | ~30% | Distributed. |
For a specialist exit-bridge lender, London and the South East together account for 44 to 51% of the addressable pool. National coverage is preferable but a London + South East focus captures roughly half the volume with concentrated coverage.
Why developer prospecting fails when it relies on broker channels alone
Most exit-bridge originations today come through broker channels. Brokers have visibility into their own client base and their introducer networks. They do not have visibility into the wider market of stalled developers who have either exhausted their broker relationships during the original bridge, or never used a broker in the first place.
Direct prospecting against the charge register fills this gap. The signal stacks above are deterministic from public data; the borrower's contact route is the registered office and named directors; the message ("we've noticed your facility with X is now Y months over its expected term, would you like a quote to take it out?") is grounded in observable fact rather than cold inference.
For lenders running an in-house origination function alongside the broker channel, the direct-prospect motion typically adds 15 to 30% to overall origination volume without cannibalising broker flow.
Caveats and coverage
Data is England & Wales. Scottish and Northern Irish development security is held under different registers and is not in scope. Loan-size data is not available from Companies House charge filings; lenders must overlay their own pricing assumptions for revenue estimation.
Find the stalled-developer cohort in your patch
GalimAI surfaces UK development-bridge borrowers by region, lender, project address and charge age. Exit-bridge originators use the portal to size their pipeline from public Companies House data.
Try the portal Book a callFAQ
How does the portal identify development bridges specifically?
Through a combination of charge product type tags (where filed) and lender-category mapping. Charges registered by named development-exit and refurbishment-bridge specialists are tagged as development. Cross-referenced with SIC code on the borrower SPV.
What's a typical exit-bridge refinance size?
£500,000 to £10m at the asset level, sized to a discount-to-GDV LTV. Average across the cohort is around £1.8m to £2.4m.
How long is the exit-bridge term?
6 to 12 months typically. Some lenders write to 18 months for larger or more complex schemes.
Can I see project addresses?
Yes, where the charge filing references the specific title. The portal links back to HM Land Registry title references where available.
Is contact data included?
Yes. Director and registered-office contact data is included on every prospect record.