Landed estates and private banking interview: Aidan Faik, Weatherbys Private Bank

Lizzie Egan speaks to Aidan Faik, senior private banker and head of landed estates at Weatherbys Private Bank.

Are you seeing particular trends in the types of assets or projects clients are bringing to you for finance?

The focus shifts from year to year. The current conversation centres on residential portfolios — clients are having to make difficult decisions in an environment of high cost, elevated risk, and compressed yields. Holiday lets are emerging as an alternative, offering stronger yields and a lighter regulatory burden, though they bring their own operational demands and seasonality. 

What level of lending activity are you currently seeing in the rural and country property market?

Last year was our strongest year to date in the rural team, and that momentum has continued into 2026. For a sustained period, clients were understandably cautious — responding to base rate movements, geopolitical uncertainty, and other market factors. But that caution has its limits, and as the rate environment has improved, projects and acquisitions have started to make sense again. Our clients are moving forward and deploying capital. We have not seen a meaningful slowdown this year.

Are lenders generally well-equipped to finance non-market standard borrowing?

There is significant variation across the market. A number of the larger banks don’t wish to lend to trust structures — the risk-reward calculus, viewed from the top of a large institution, does not always justify maintaining the specialist expertise required. We understand that commercial logic, even if it is not ours. For Weatherbys, trust structures are a core part of our business. Trustees and beneficiaries are, structurally, no different from directors and shareholders — it is simply another structure, and one we are very comfortable with. 

Base rate volatility has been a defining feature of recent years. How has this shaped your approach to pricing and structuring?

Our advice to clients is consistent: do not attempt to play the interest rate game. If a project makes sense at the current rate, the right approach is to lock in, remove the interest rate risk, and focus on running the estate. We typically structure clients with a blend of facilities: a long-term fixed rate element sitting in the background; a variable rate facility that can be reduced without early repayment charges; and a working overdraft calibrated to the day-to-day requirements of the farm or estate. We build the structure from scratch, based on what the client actually needs.

How does the residential/commercial classification of a property affect the terms you are able to offer?

This is becoming increasingly material as Basel 3.1 approaches. Residential security is the regulator's preferred asset class by a significant margin. The difference in risk-weighting between a residential asset — which may attract a 20% risk weighting — and a commercial or non-standard asset — which can reach 100% — means that borrowing against non-residential security could be as much as five times more expensive. Clients need to understand that dynamic, particularly those with mixed portfolios.

The priority is to maximise the residential element of the security. We can facilitate this through off-estate properties held personally, brought in by way of guarantee. The second priority is keeping loan-to-value as modest as the client's position allows. There is a straightforward logic to this: greater security improves credit terms, but it also future-proofs the relationship. If a client needs capital at short notice — an urgent repair, an unexpected opportunity — the groundwork has already been done, and we can respond quickly. It is about building a structure that is resilient over time, not just efficient today.

Has the Renters' Rights Act had an impact on your clients or on the wider lending market?

It is having a tangible effect on decision-making. We have clients who have served notice on residential tenants across their estate — all of those properties are reverting to the estate, and the decision has been taken to move into holiday lets and other opportunities. The rental income generated under existing arrangements simply does not justify the risk profile that the incoming legislation creates.

The broader implication, however, requires careful thought. Disposing of residential properties or converting them from long-term lets into short-term use may affect how that security is valued by the bank. A diversified approach — maintaining a meaningful residential base whilst exploring alternative uses for other units — remains a prudent strategy.

Farming has faced a particularly challenging period. How does Weatherbys approach lending to farming operations, and what are clients in that sector focusing on right now?

Where farming represents a significant part of a client's income, the conversation has increasingly turned to resilience rather than growth. Water security is a prominent theme— clients are investing in reservoir infrastructure and ensuring they have reliable, controlled access to water. That is a material capital commitment, and it is one we are prepared to support where the underlying rationale is sound.

More broadly, our approach to farming lending follows the same discipline we apply across all estate finance: we look at the whole picture. Farming income rarely sits in isolation — it is one strand within a broader estate or trust structure, alongside residential lets, commercial diversification, and potentially environmental income streams. We assess affordability holistically, identify where the lending should properly sit within that structure, and build the facility accordingly.

Who are your typical clients, and what sets Weatherbys apart from other private banks?

Weatherbys has a distinguished history — the bank was originally established to serve the racing world, and that heritage remains very much part of who we are today. Our private banking client base spans technology entrepreneurs, sports professionals, US-based clients — supported by a dedicated American team — and a significant number of landed families and estate owners.

What distinguishes us is straightforward: we are bankers, rather than mortgage lenders or investment managers. We do undertake those activities, and they represent a meaningful part of the business, but at the heart of everything we do is the day-to-day banking relationship. We are not transactional — we are relationship bankers. That ethos runs through everything, from setting up online access to issuing a chequebook.

You specifically work with landed estates and high-net-worth individuals — how has your offering evolved to meet their needs?

The core offering does not change, but our approach to each proposition does. A salaried professional seeking a five-year mortgage is a very different proposition to an estate with multiple income streams that may be reliant on capital sales. In both cases, our objective is the same: remove complexity, identify what we are trying to achieve, and find the most efficient route to get there. The complexity of the proposition varies considerably — but the discipline of simplifying it does not.

How does Weatherbys approach financing more complex diversified propositions?

We take a holistic view of the estate as a whole. For example, a solar farm generating income within a separate limited company, held within a corporate structure, is assessed as part of the broader picture — not in isolation. We identify where affordability should properly be concentrated and structure the lending accordingly.

Where we assess a project individually, the discipline is the same: does it make sense? What is the payback period, what are the risks, and is this genuinely the best use of capital? In some cases, redeploying funds into residential refurbishment may deliver a better risk-adjusted return. We always come back to the same question: what are we trying to achieve, and what is the most effective way to get there?

Are you financing biodiversity net gain projects, and how do you approach the structuring challenges?

We are — the structuring challenge is not affordability, it is security. Removing an income stream from a parcel of land and adding a conservation covenant to maintain it in a specified condition will have a downward effect on the valuation of that land. The question we are working through is what happens to the bank's security profile once the scheme is operational.

We stress-test the proposal rigorously: if only half the units sell, if the price per unit falls by 50%, does the proposition still hold? Biodiversity net gain is a new area for us, but it is one we find genuinely interesting. 

Finally, what is the single most important thing a landowner or estate manager should be discussing with their bank or financial adviser right now? 

Basel 3.1. The level of awareness among trustees and estate owners remains surprisingly low, given the significance of the changes arriving on 1 January 2027. A facility that works well for the bank today may look very different under the new framework. At Weatherbys, we are already applying the post-3.1 model— we treat it as already in force, so that there are no surprises for our clients when it formally takes effect.

Beyond that, cash flow. A detailed, well-maintained cash flow forecast is the most valuable document a client can provide - If we can identify a potential issue twelve to eighteen months in advance, we can structure a solution before it becomes a problem.

*Note: Basel 3.1 is a set of international rules that include the requirement for banks to hold more money in reserve when they lend against property. The idea is that if a borrower defaults, the bank has enough of a financial cushion to absorb the loss. The rules are stricter for riskier types of property lending — for example, loans on commercial properties or properties bought as investments face tougher requirements than a standard home mortgage. Development loans (where money is lent to build new properties) face the toughest requirements of all. The practical effect is that borrowing against non-residential property is likely to become more expensive, as banks pass on the cost of holding that extra capital through higher interest rates and fees.

This article is intended for professional advisers and high-net-worth individuals. It is intended for general information purposes only and reflects current market observations as at the date of publication. It does not constitute financial advice or recommendation.