In 2025, property borrowers are encountering a familiar paradox. Capital is abundant globally, yet the path to it can feel narrower than ever—particularly for projects that are complex, transitional, or time-sensitive. Relationship banks remain vital for low-risk, low-LTV facilities, but tighter credit appetite and lengthier committee cycles mean many proposals that would have sailed through five years ago now spend months in limbo. Into this void have stepped private debt funds: specialist, non-bank lenders that combine institutional money with a commercial approach to underwriting. They move quickly, price risk pragmatically, and focus on deliverability rather than box-ticking. For the right sponsors, that shift doesn’t just unlock capital—it restores certainty of execution.

If your own experience echoes this trend, you’re not alone. We’ve been charting the same change in our work with private clients and developers and in recent pieces such as Private Credit vs. Private Banking: Choosing the Right Partner for Large Property Finance and Funding Large-Scale Development Projects in 2025: How Private Clients Compete with Institutions. The headline is simple: where banks hesitate, private funds step in—not as a last resort, but as a first-choice solution when speed, structure, and nuanced risk work are decisive.

What makes 2025 different is not merely that funds are active; it’s how they are organising themselves and how they are partnering with borrowers. The most credible funds today behave with the discipline of banks (robust documentation, clear covenants, real-time monitoring) but retain the agility that complex transactions demand. They will listen to a blended story—planning gain plus value-add capex; mixed-use with an anchor operator; or cross-border income with tight compliance—and build a capital solution around that, rather than forcing it into a pre-set template.

From back-up plan to first call

A few years ago, private credit was where deals went when a bank declined. In 2025, sophisticated sponsors often run dual-track from day one: bank and fund alongside each other, or even leading with private credit if timing is unforgiving. The rationale is straightforward. Private lenders can issue terms faster, triage diligence more effectively, and close in weeks rather than months when the case is well prepared. That timing advantage is not theoretical. In auctions, land options, and expiring bridge scenarios, a fortnight can be the margin between securing an asset and watching it slip away. For a sense of how condensed timetables are managed in practice, many borrowers reference our explainer How Fast Can Bridging Finance Be Arranged?.

Speed alone, however, would not have moved the market if structures were crude or covenants blunt. The modern private fund underwrites with a surprising level of granularity. Rather than dismissing a mixed-use scheme because it won’t fit a single yield template, the fund will look through to operator covenants, anchor pre-lets, realistic absorption, and phased cash-flow. Rather than walking away from cross-border sponsorship, it will ask whether AML/KYC is watertight and whether income and liquidity can be evidenced in forms that satisfy a risk committee. This is underwriting built around the totality of deliverability—sponsorship, programme, counterparties, exit logic—rather than a rigid checklist.

Where private debt funds are strongest

The most active situations in 2025 share a common feature: transitional risk that can be controlled by structure, governance, and effort. Heavy refurbishments and repositionings are a prime example. Banks often struggle with the combination of construction risk, lease-up uncertainty, and valuation volatility; funds, by contrast, are comfortable taking a holistic view if the sponsor’s team is credible, the cost plan is properly interrogated, and the exit is evidence-based. Our guides How to Access Development Finance in the UK and Development Finance in 2025: What’s Changed and What Lenders Want Now outline the presentation standard that consistently wins approvals.

Mixed-use and multi-phase schemes are another clear win. The bank preference for simplicity is long-standing; many credit policies are calibrated for single-use risk. Funds are more comfortable blending the income picture and sequencing drawdowns to construction and leasing milestones. We explored that approach in Financing Prime Mixed-Use Developments: Structuring for Multi-Asset Income Streams and in our broader primer How to Finance a Mixed-Use Property in 2025.

Short-term strategies—bridge-to-sale, bridge-to-refi, bridge-to-stabilisation—also suit private funds. What they value is not an optimistic timeline but a credible, documented exit path with defined dependencies and sensible back-ups. If you are planning a stepping-stone facility, it’s worth revisiting What Is Bridging Finance and When Should You Use It? and Bridging to Mortgage: How to Transition Smoothly in 2025. In each case, the discipline that de-risks a bridge for a fund is the exact same discipline that makes the long-term lender comfortable at exit.

Cross-border and complex-income sponsors round out the picture. Where documentation is diverse, currencies are mixed, or income is partly offshore, a fund will often be more pragmatic than a bank—provided the compliance spine is sturdy. The baseline questions are old-fashioned: can you prove you are who you say you are; can you prove your money is where you say it is; and can you demonstrate that your plan survives realistic stress tests? For more on the moving parts in international profiles, see How International Investors Can Finance UK Property in 2025 and the UK Mortgages for Expats and Overseas Buyers – 2025 Ultimate Guide.

Pricing, leverage, and covenants, what’s actually changed

No two funds price identically; mandates, cost of capital, and risk appetites differ. Yet a pattern is visible. Leverage on development is framed around LTC and GDV, not just LTV, and may sit above conservative bank thresholds where feasibility is robust and exits are tangible. On stabilised income deals, leverage is frequently constrained by valuer assumptions as much as by lender appetite. If the acronyms are fuzzy, our explainer LTV, LTC, and GDV: The Three Numbers That Shape Your Property Deal is a useful orientation.

On price, funds sit above vanilla bank senior. But when speed, structure, and execution certainty are properly valued, the total economics can be superior—particularly for projects where time is a genuine cost and an extra turn of leverage supports value creation. Covenant packages are generally clearer and tighter than many borrowers expect: cash sweeps that actually mirror the business plan rather than punish it; reporting timetables aligned to construction rhythms; and intercreditor mechanics that protect both lender and sponsor if milestones slip. In practice, some of the most attractive outcomes come from hybrid stacks—a bank at senior with a private fund top-up, or a fund at senior with mezzanine or preferred equity above—coordinated so that conditions precedent and drawdown mechanics dovetail. Where a single lender’s ticket is insufficient, syndicated or club solutions provide a single front door for the borrower. We unpacked those structures in Syndicated Lending for Private Borrowers: When One Lender Isn’t Enough.

Packaging the credit story, how to earn speed and certainty

Private funds move quickly when the story is coherent. That does not mean a glossy deck; it means a single source of truth that integrates planning, costs, programme, income, and exit into a model that stands up to scrutiny. Lenders respond to evidence: operator interest letters and draft heads of terms, realistic absorption curves, credible contractor capacity, and third-party validation from QS and monitor. They also respond to governance: a live data room, named responsibilities across the sponsor’s team, and a cadence of reporting that leaves no room for surprises.

If your plan includes a bridge, exit discipline matters twice: once at entry—so the fund can get comfortable—and again at the handover to term debt. The playbooks Why Every Bridging Loan Needs a Clear Exit Strategy and Exit Strategies for Bridging Loans and Development Finance: The 2025 Guide outline how to maintain leverage, manage valuation gaps, and avoid last-minute scrambles.

Family offices and funds, convergence, not competition

A notable 2025 theme is the convergence between private debt funds and family offices. Many families now operate direct lending mandates alongside fund commitments, meaning the continuum of capital spans pure bank, bank-adjacent, pure private fund, and family co-lending. For borrowers, this is an opportunity rather than a complication: a carefully arranged club can balance price, flexibility, and ticket size more elegantly than any single source. Our recent piece How Family Offices Are Approaching Property Debt in 2025 explores why families value downside-protected yield and what convinces them to lean in.

Persistent misconceptions and why they miss the mark

One misconception is that private funds are a last resort. In reality, they are now a first resort when structure and timing, rather than raw coupon, determine value. Another is that funds “don’t underwrite—just price high.” In truth, the best funds underwrite harder on delivery, counterparties, and exit than many banks; they simply retain the freedom to price complexity. A third is that terms are “non-negotiable.” They aren’t—when sponsors can show how documentation aligns with operational reality. Where borrowers retain private banking relationships, a bank-adjacent design can offer the best of both worlds; our overview Private Bank Mortgages Explained: Benefits and Drawbacks remains a helpful comparator.

Where funds say “yes” and when they won’t

Funds engage fastest when the sponsor’s track record is bank-grade, the plan is internally consistent, and exits are grounded in more than hope. They are comfortable with transitional risk; they are allergic to ambiguity. If a proposal relies on values “coming back,” on unproven operator promises, or on sales that contradict local evidence, expect a decline or a heavily caveated term sheet. Conversely, where a strong sponsor faces a temporary liquidity need, using securities-backed lending to unlock cash without disturbing long-term holdings can be smarter than over-levering the property facility itself; see Securities Backed Lending in 2025: The Definitive Guide for HNW Borrowers, Developers, and Advisers and Using Investment Portfolios to Secure Large Mortgage Loans in 2025.

How Willow can help

At Willow Private Finance, we sit at the junction of banks, private funds, and family offices. Our job is to translate a complex market into a single, controlled process that balances price, leverage, covenants, and speed—without losing sight of your long-term objectives. For developers, that means structuring senior-and-mezz stacks, coordinating clubs, and running diligence so build programmes are not derailed by financing. For portfolio owners, it means designing refinance and capex plans that enhance NOI and covenant headroom, then placing the debt with the counterparty best aligned to your exit timetable. For international and HNW clients, it means integrating offshore income, trusts, or SPVs into underwrites that private funds will accept—often faster than traditional routes.

The through-line in every mandate is presentation. We package credit the way institutional committees want to see it: one feasibility model; one data room; one calendar of deliverables. That discipline wins better terms and fewer last-minute surprises. If your bank has paused, priced conservatively, or capped leverage below what the plan requires, we’ll show you how private debt can bridge the gap—without abandoning governance or long-term optionality. And if a bank remains the right anchor, we will build a bank-adjacent stack that lets private funds do what they do best: add speed and structure where it matters.

Frequently Asked Questions

1) Are private debt funds replacing banks in 2025?
No. Each has a lane. Banks excel at low-risk, low-LTV term debt. Private funds specialise in speed, structure, and transitional risk. The best outcomes often come from a hybrid stack that uses both.

2) What deal sizes are most active for private funds?
Most mandates focus on £10M to £100M per transaction, though specialist lenders operate above and below that band. Ticket size is less important than deliverability and exit logic.

3) How fast can a private fund complete?
Clean cases can close in weeks when diligence is properly packaged and third-party reports are in train. For urgent timetables, see How Fast Can Bridging Finance Be Arranged?.

4) Are terms always more expensive than banks?
Pricing typically sits above bank senior. But when you value speed, certainty, and flexible structure—particularly where an extra turn of leverage creates outsized value—the total economics can be superior.

5) What must I prepare to secure a commitment?
An integrated feasibility model; evidence-based exits; independent QS/valuer input; a named project monitor; and a live data room. If that list feels heavy, start with How to Access Development Finance in the UK for a practical checklist.

📞 Want Help Navigating Today’s Market?

 Book a free strategy call with one of our mortgage specialists.


We’ll help you find the smartest way forward—whatever rates do next.