Case Study (Mixed SME) (2026): Restructure 5 Facilities Into 2
Asset finance restructure case study for SME business owners | Switchboard Finance
🧾 restructure · repayments · balloon timing ·
Business Owners Finance Hub · 2026
This is the common “grown fast” problem: a mixed SME ends up with five separate Facility lines (vehicles, equipment, and cashflow), with different repayment dates and a nasty Balloon Payment landing at the wrong time.
If you want the base frameworks first, start with: Refinance vs Restructure vs Top-Up and the warning-sign lens: 5 Cash Flow Warning Signs. This post shows how it looks in the real world — and how to clean it up.
- It reduces “repayment clutter” that quietly breaks Servicing.
- It gives you one clean story for Borrowing Capacity instead of five competing lines.
- It prevents a balloon landing during your busiest cashflow stress window.
Scenario (before): 5 separate lines, 1 big timing problem
The business had two work vehicles, one equipment line, and two short cashflow lines. Nothing was “bad” — the issue was the combined weekly drag and a balloon due right before a seasonal slow patch.
The first step was simple: request every Payout Figure, and list all Exit Fees that would trigger if we moved early. Without this, restructures get stuck in “pending” or blow out in cost.
| Line (before) | What it was doing | Hidden pain | What we changed (after) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle loan #1 | Reliable, but high weekly | Repayment date clashed with supplier run | Rolled into “Asset Line A” (matched pay cycle) |
| Vehicle loan #2 | Lower rate, short remaining term | Balloon due too soon | Reset timing + adjusted term to avoid crunch |
| Equipment line | Good asset, messy structure | Different lender, different rules | Rolled into “Asset Line A” (cleaner story) |
| Cashflow line #1 | Plugged gaps | Looked like “stacking” | Replaced with one structured facility |
| Cashflow line #2 | Short-term top-ups | Too many debits/repayment events | Merged into “Cashflow Line B” |
The restructure plan (after): 2 lines with clean logic
We consolidated into two lines: one asset line (vehicles + equipment) and one cashflow line. The aim wasn’t “maximum debt” — it was controlled repayments and predictable timing.
The asset line used a single structure and Term Length that matched the business cycle, with rates set as Variable Rate for flexibility while the business stabilised.
- Entity basics: ABN + GST Registered status aligned to trading reality.
- Proof set: Bank Statements, BAS, and Trading History told the same story.
- Risk management: director obligations acknowledged once via a Director’s Guarantee (not hidden, not “surprise”).
- We documented the key Loan Covenant triggers that cause re-work (and built around them).
- We reduced the number of new Credit Enquiry events by sequencing the application correctly.
- We used a “safety-net” facility choice that matched the business (see: Low Doc Cashflow Path).
What the 2 lines actually were (and when each fits)
“Line A” was the asset consolidation piece (vehicles + equipment) — this is where most SMEs should anchor first. If you want the approval-speed playbook, start with Fast-Track Asset Finance.
“Line B” was the cashflow stabiliser. The correct choice depends on what’s creating the gap: timing gaps, baseline gaps, or invoice gaps. (See: Invoice Finance for Growing SMEs.)
| Problem | Facility match | What it does | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timing gaps (a few days) | Business Line of Credit | Draw, repay, redraw for short gaps | Wages/supplier timing issues |
| Baseline gaps (every month) | Working Capital | Stabilises the base cash position | Seasonal or expansion pressure |
| Invoice gaps (paid late) | Invoice Finance | Turns invoices into predictable funds | B2B / trade-heavy SMEs |
Results: lower weekly pressure + balloon timing fixed
The weekly repayment load reduced because we removed duplicated repayment events and cleaned the structure. The balloon risk reduced because it was pushed into a window where the business historically had surplus cash.
The tax side still matters too: if you’re restructuring business finance, understand what counts as deductible business expenses. (Official reference: ATO — Business deductions.)
- Get payouts + exit costs first (don’t guess).
- Reduce repayment “events” (less clutter = cleaner assessment).
- Match the cashflow tool to the gap type (timing vs baseline vs invoices).
- Keep one clean narrative linking assets + operations (no contradictions).
This case study worked because we simplified the structure: five lines became two, repayment clutter dropped, and balloon timing was moved into a safer window. The key was sequencing (payouts + exit costs first) and choosing the correct cashflow tool.
If you’re planning a restructure, start with the money pages: Low Doc Asset Finance and Business Loans. Then read: Refinance vs Restructure vs Top-Up.
FAQ
When it reduces repayment “events” and removes overlap that inflates monthly outgoings. Lenders assess this through Affordability — if the new structure is simpler and more predictable, outcomes usually improve.
No — use the Comparison Rate logic as a sanity check, and always factor in fees and timing. A “cheap” deal can still be expensive if the structure forces refinances at the wrong time.
Sequence properly and minimise Hard Enquiry events. Multiple hits in a short window can make the file look distressed even when the business is fine.
Early Termination costs (plus any break/exit costs) are what blow up “savings” projections. Always confirm them before you decide to consolidate.
It depends on the goal and risk appetite. A Secured Business Loan can reduce cost and increase capacity, but it ties the deal to security and conditions. If speed/flexibility matters more, other structures can fit better.
Disclaimer: This content is general information only and isn’t financial, legal, or tax advice.
