There is a lot of diligence and headaches when you are involving the bank's money. Sellers like cash offers and it's at least a tiebreaker factor when you have two equal offers, in fact many sellers will prefer an all-cash offer even if it's a bit less in the end (small buyers are gonna wanna quibble about another couple grand for property defects too).
Yes, it's perfectly sensible to use the bank's money when it's a fairly sure bet and the interest rate is low... but there is a big complexity cliff that exists between "used 0.1% of the bank's money" and "used 0% of the bank's money". Using 0% of the bank's money is preferable when closing the deal at least.
If you are in a position to make an all-cash offer but you want financing, you could probably buy the property in cash and then get a mortgage after. That's not the usual workflow for homebuyers but I don't see why you couldn't do it, it's just like refinancing really.
You don't even need to do that, just make an all cash offer and set the closing date like 30-45 days out and you can finance it from the get go. You just need that extra closing time to get the financing ironed out and then you can still pay for a home with a mortgage even if you made an all cash offer. That is what I did with a place back in March.
Yes, it's perfectly sensible to use the bank's money when it's a fairly sure bet and the interest rate is low... but there is a big complexity cliff that exists between "used 0.1% of the bank's money" and "used 0% of the bank's money". Using 0% of the bank's money is preferable when closing the deal at least.
If you are in a position to make an all-cash offer but you want financing, you could probably buy the property in cash and then get a mortgage after. That's not the usual workflow for homebuyers but I don't see why you couldn't do it, it's just like refinancing really.