Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » Renting your home

Why you're better off renting

John Fitzsimons
by Lovemoney Staff John Fitzsimons on 16 November 2010  |  Comments 36 comments

Forget getting on the ladder - right now it makes more sense to stick to renting.

Why you're better off renting

If you fancy buying a property, the market can look a bit bleak at the moment. Property chains are at standstill, with sellers struggling to find interest in their homes, and buyers going from lender to lender trying to find one with both the cash and inclination to help.

Is it time to rely on renting?

Buying is expensive

Don’t tell my wife, but at the weekend I spent a good half an hour flicking through the property listings section of our local paper. It’s not that we want to move anytime soon (particularly after the money and effort that has gone into the baby’s room) but we are starting a family, and the fact is that in a couple of years our two-bedroom maisonette might not be big enough.

However, what I saw were some pretty ordinary looking properties with some pretty extraordinary prices. I know we got a bit of a bargain with our home, but asking prices of almost £100,000 more than we paid, simply for a two-bedroom house rather than maisonette? As for three-bedrooms, forget it.

The fact is that asking prices are still pretty steep in the UK. According to Rightmove, asking prices between October 2009 and this year grew by 2.9%. Indeed, in October alone they jumped 3.1%! The average asking price stood at a steep £236,849. And that's simply asking too much of many buyers.

Sellers are getting the message – asking prices on Rightmove have fallen 3.2% in November, the largest monthly drop since December 2007, while Zoopla reckons a third of homebuyers using the site have cut their asking prices at least once since August. However, those prices have evidently not been cut by enough to make buying seem a good option.

The mortgage difficulties

And even if you do find a property at a respectable price, actually buying it is tough too.

Just how low transaction levels are is made clear by figures from the Council of Mortgage Lenders. In September there were just 50,000 loans for purchase advanced, a pretty meagre number and unchanged from August.

Related blog post

And the amounts being lent are shockingly low – both August and September gross mortgage lending were at the lowest levels in a decade!

Lenders have tightened up their criteria since the credit crunch (rightly) but the cautious approach is leaving many potential buyers with a tough task of finding a mortgage. Buying a property at the moment involves some serious grief.

Ditch the Halifax House Price Index!

So buying is a nightmare, but is renting that much better?

One of the big benefits of renting your home rather than owning it is that you don’t have to waste your time and energy worrying about what the latest house price index has said. Whether Halifax says house prices are up, Nationwide says prices are down, or Hometrack says they’re both, it’s not your problem!

And given the pessimism about what will happen to house prices once the Government cuts kick in and interest rates start to head northwards, chances are things are going to be grim on that front in the foreseeable future!

Keeping flexible

Another real bonus to renting is that you can be a bit more flexible in where you live. Sure, you’ll sign up to a year long contract, but in 12 months’ time if you fancy a change of scenery, or perhaps a smaller commute, you can simply try renting somewhere else.

A group of my friends are going through the travelling phase, ditching the UK for six months (or more) of moving between hostels around Australasia. And it’s a lot easier to do that if you don’t have to worry about being tied into a mortgage!

Compare that to people like me who are on a five-year mortgage. Even if I wanted to move somewhere else, I know it would cost a fortune to get out of my deal, even before you add the costs of a new property and related costs like estate agent and legal fees.

A relaxed life

What’s more, if anything goes wrong with a rented property, it’s not really your problem. OK, so it’s annoying if the boiler blows up or there’s a problem with the central heating, but you won’t be the one having to pay for repairs or a replacement.

Rob Powell hits the streets to get your views on five of the biggest property myths facing tenants.

Compare that to the paranoia many homebuyers experience (myself included) the second the radiator starts making funny noises!

Renting is cheaper...

However, as nice as all of those benefits are, they don’t mean a jot if renting works out more expensive than buying, particularly when you are at least putting your cash into an asset when paying off a mortgage.

According to the latest rental survey from LSL Property Services, the average rent currently stands at £689 per month. Let’s compare that to buying a property at the current national average price of £166,769 (according to the most recent Land Registry figures) with a 20% deposit (giving you an actual mortgage figure of £133,415) at a rate of 5% on a 25 year mortgage.

In that scenario, you’ll be looking at monthly repayments of £788.84, a good £100 a month more than if you stick to renting!

...but perhaps not for long

However, it’s worth noting that rents have increased for the last eight months straight. This is because demand for renting far outweighs supply currently. And with buy-to-let landlords still struggling to get hold of decent funding to expand their portfolios, that situation is only likely to continue, meaning rents will continue to rise.

So while renting currently looks a financially better option, that may not be the case for that much longer.

Fighting off other renters

The other thing to remember with such huge demand for rental properties is that you will very rarely be the only interested party in a property. The really good rental homes will go in no time, so you’ll need to act quickly.

It also means that you may be searching for the right property for a while, so you’ll need to be patient.

Tell us what you think

Are you better off renting? Or is renting just money down the drain? Join in the debate using the comments box below!

More: The secret clause in your mortgage contract | Why big houses are seeing big price falls

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (36)

  • IFAPaul
    Love rating 2
    IFAPaul said

    Renting should only be a short term option whilst saving for a deposit.

    Buying should be a no brainer if taken on a repayment mortgage as by retirement you should be mortgage free.

    It is surely better to be in that position than having to find rent out of a pension or rely on the state.

    I know this is the ideal scenario but isn't it best to have this aim?

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • hodgy
    Love rating 2
    hodgy said

    The reason we rent is it is just so hard to get a deposit together nowadays. Taking the example above, you would need £32,000 for a 20% deposit. Say that you can afford to put £100 a month away for savings (the difference between renting and buying in this example) it will take you over 20 years to get the money required together.

    The issue we have found is that house prices are increasing much faster than we can put a decent deposit together.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    John, are you really saying renting is cheaper, or that it is easier, or less worry, or better?

    Really?

    Taking your numbers from above.

    If you choose to rent for the full 25 years, you will have paid out £206,700 (assuming constant rent) and own nothing at the end of that period.

    If you choose to purchase, over 25 years, you will have paid out £236,400, and own the house at the end. If you assume that house prices and interest rates remain constant over the 25 year period, then you will now own an asset worth £166,769.

    That is a difference of £29,700. So adding the initial deposit value (£33,353) = £62,053.

    So, basically you have made a total 'profit' of £104,716. AND have no further costs to keep a roof over your head for the rest of your life.

    If you assume a further 20 years of living, then that's an additional £165,360 in rent payments, against nothing to pay when the mortgage has been paid back in full.

    So, over 45 years that difference in payments is £270,076 in favour of buying.

    OK, I fully accept that my calculations are very basic, and don't take into account any costs for repairing and maintaining your mortgaged home, or changes to interest rates, or even changes to rent charges. As these really cannot be foreseen, I have chosen to ignore them for demonstration purposes. The numbers though speak for themselves.

    So, is renting cheaper?

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  2 loves
  • hodgy
    Love rating 2
    hodgy said

    @iamcoldsteve: absolutely agree with your point, that logically buying is the better option financially.

    However, it's not so simple as "choosing" to rent or buy. For a lot of first time buyers the "choice" is just not there. The option to buy is not available due to size of the deposit required.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Oh Pulease
    Love rating 3
    Oh Pulease said

    Actually no.

    We have rented a five bedroom property for the last 2 years. Why? Because to buy at or near the top of the market would have been crazy. The property we live in was valued at almost £600K three years ago. Today? It would perhaps fetch £450K - if they could shift it. In the meantime we might have paid £40K in rent with absolutely no repair bills or worries. Do the math. Anyone who believes the official figures is ignoring the reality. Official figures come out from parties with vested interests.

    Renting makes sense at this stage in what will be a protracted bear market. Almost all of the main downward forces that are normally seen are not active right now. Unemployment is still low compared to what it will be, interest rates - on the floor, there is 4X the normal housing stock for sale with no buyers and people will take hits when they have to move.

    I feel more confident than ever that in another 4 years the market will bottom and then I will buy. In the meantime, my money works for me - and I don't owe the bank, or anyone, a sausage. 

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    Hodgy, you are right of course.

    However, the title of the article was simply cost based. There was no provision for choice, or anything else. So purely financially, my numbers stack up.

    I also agree with 'oh pulease' in that buying at the top of the market (if a crash happens thereafter) is folly.

    As I said above, I have made assumptions (rightly, or wrongly) and based it purely on financial matters. No emotion and no consideration of getting the deposit together either.

    Also, with renting you are very limited to what you can do with the house. Ie need permission for just about anything. Be it painting, putting up shelves and extensions are a no-no. You also face the very real risk of being either asked to leave (due process, of course) or the tenancy not being re-newed.

    So, not only is buying considerably cheaper, it is also more secure and keeps your options much more open.

    (A quick survey in my office found that of the people questioned, 100% with mortgaged houses did NOT worry about it's current value)

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • supasap
    Love rating 19
    supasap said

    oh pulease .............. can you "pulease" add an s to math to get maths..... this is the UK

    things would look so different in a free market where housing benefit only existed for a small minority of helpless individuals (downward pressure on rents) and if housebuilders could build where they wanted instead of being constrained by awkward nimby planning rules (downward pressure on houses)..... but these things can only last as long as the UK government is solvent

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Oh Pulease
    Love rating 3
    Oh Pulease said

    lamcoldsteve.

    I don't think you have much experience of renting. We need no permission to 'put up shelves' and we don't need to redecorate as the landlord is happy to assist because he wants us to be happy and stay. If we wanted an extension, we would move with a couple of months notice and no estate agents, banks or fees to pay. If asked to leave, we find somewhere else to live - change is good not something to be feared. And we are a family of 5.

    Buying is NOT cheaper by any stretch as we have saved £110K by not doing so, so far. Which doesn't include maintenance savings just rent. If you want the stress of owning and maintaining a house that doesn't actually belong to you (it belongs to the bank) then fair enough. Personally, we will buy ours with cash once our savings match prices in 4 years time. Yes, I am debt free and saving loads by living within our means. 

    You don't have to follow the crowd into a debt and stress-ridden life. There are other ways of doing things.

    Options are opened by fewer restraints like debts and millstones around your neck. Renting is freedom to choose. 

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • StuartR
    Love rating 6
    StuartR said

    Also missing from this is any element relating to the cost of ownership. With renting all the significant maintenance is the responsibility of the landlord, which over a long period of ownership can save considerable amounts of money.

    We rent, through choice, and pay a fraction of what it would cost to purchase the house we live in - e.g. £950 pcm rent vs £450,000. We also know that if the boiler packs up, or the roof needs fixing, the landlord will sort this out.

    In short, whether renting is financially better than buying, is down to the exact circumstances of the individual who is doing the assessment. 

    The purchase market has been a distorted market for years for a variety of reasons: self cert mortgages; house price bubbles: lack of credit to name but a few, but then so has the rental sector; the rush into buy to let; housing benefit inflation. Whether you would be better of buying or renting may well depend on which of the distortions apply to you, at the time you need to choose between renting and buying.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • houstonstewart
    Love rating 24
    houstonstewart said

    To 'lovers of renting, don't buy property crew', congregation to the Church of D'Arcy - thank you, thank you, thank you. As a landlord dependent on rentals for my pension income I am extremely grateful to you all, so keep banging your drum.

    Oh I know you want the likes of me to get my come uppance when the property market crashes 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 etc etc but heyho any rise or fall in property values is a paper exercise until I do sell and is all relative to buying right in the first place. And guess what I ain't selling, I'll continue to buy when its right.

    I absolutely agree there is nothing wrong with renting, lots of advantages. But just as well we don't all agree with that there is only one view after all with morgages so difficult and if there were no landlords where would you all live? Good luck with the B&B's, Hotels and tents on the common.

    Renting Rules - Got my vote.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    Oh Pulease.

    I haven't rented for quite a while (over 10 years), but do know that you seem quite lucky in that your landlord seems quite responsible.

    A lot aren't and won't let you do anything without permission. Any 'damage' would need to be paid for, that includes drilling holes for shelves etc.

    I have listed the assumptions and limitations in my example above and although maintenance costs etc are not included, they will not be anywhere near the £270,000 number 'saved' after 45 years.

    You do have to be realistic though in what maintenance is going to be required. Boiler 'blowing up', roof needing replacing etc - -yes they can and do happen. But how frequently? So what is the actual risk? Paranoia may think the risk is far higher than it is in reality.

    Some people will not want to live in the same house for 45 years - fact. BUT the article was about renting being cheaper - clearly from my example using the authors own numbers, it is not.

    We have our choices and do what suits our lifestyle. Some rent, some buy. But the truth of the matter is that continuing to rent over the very long term will cost dearly.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • philemon
    Love rating 0
    philemon said

    How about shared ownership (part buy, part rent)? Anyone think this is a good idea? 

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • thanet04
    Love rating 13
    thanet04 said

    as someone in my 50's who has been renting since my marraige split up, I can see no advantage to buying.

    What people are missing is what happens if you lose your job? - rent gets paid by local authority.

    What happens when you retire - see above.

    What happens if you own your property and have to go into care?

    These are the intangible assets to renting as against to owning.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kittzy
    Love rating 32
    kittzy said

    Absolutely and most deffinately buying is cheaper, your quote for the cost of renting vs buying has used the repayment mortgage model. History shows us that over almost any 10 year period that property will double in value at the very least.

    So recalculate for interest only and in 10 years selling with 100% increase in value, because i cant be bothered to work it out.

    If you want to make overpayments (repayment covered) your isa is your friend.

    Anyone who thinks renting is cheaper is under some delusion.

    Thank god for them, i hear the Landlords say :)

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • cbeffer
    Love rating 0
    cbeffer said

    One presumes in the grand scheme of things that buying must be cheaper overall than renting - otherwise why would private landlords rent out their properties?

    They don't do it out of the goodness of their hearts!

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Oh Pulease
    Love rating 3
    Oh Pulease said

    kittzy

    At the top of a property bubble everyone who buys is overpaying. They are either paying interest only mortgages (renting without the perks) or paying wild amounts of interest and almost no capital. If you are already on the mortgage ladder it doesn't matter as much (canny landlords know this well). If you are a first time buyer then it matters massively.

    We don't teach finance in schools so churn out financially illiterate people who are fodder for the financial services industry. If you think that your property is going up for the next few years then you had better hold on tight. This is going to be a rude awakening for you as you hurtle down the rollercoaster drop. The younger generation haven't lived through a recession and are blind to it. All the more fodder for the corporations who peddle the debt. 

    Do I believe in buying houses? Yes, when the time is right (and everyone is saying what crap investments they are - 'blood on the streets'). But right now, we are barely off-peak and to do so is a belief in the boom without the bust. When your £300K house is worth £225K and you have paid off nothing because you have been on an interest only mortgage for five years, tell me the £75K loss isn't going to hurt. Then add on all your fees, stamp duty, maintenance charges.... 

    It isn't rocket science, it is basic finance. Renting is cheaper when house prices are falling. If they rise again the things may change. But from 2007 onwards and with 25% + to go from here to regain fair value.... 

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Oh Pulease
    Love rating 3
    Oh Pulease said

    And in my example, you cannot move as you cannot even remortgage as the house is in serious negative equity and you could get repossessed. Add in the stress.....

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    We are now way off topic from the original direction of the article, which was saying that renting is cheaper than buying.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • savvynut
    Love rating 0
    savvynut said

    Philemon, I'm not sure how shared ownership stacks up financially over the med-long term, however my partner & I have just bought a shared equity property, a step forward I would recommend to anybody determined to get on to the propert ladder, as we were.

    Rather remarkably we secured a mortgage without a deposit (July 2010), yes I really did say that... we put down a zero percent deposit, post credit crunch, and now live and "own" a whole shinny new build 3 bedroom house. 

    I say "own", as other have pointed out, the mortgage provider really has ownership, at least for the next 25 years of my life, but as far as "it's our name on the land registry records" goes WE OWN IT.

    The deal is that (round figures for ease of the demo) the house being valued at £200,000, we mortgaged £140,000 (70%), the house builder chipped in £30,000 (15%) and the government Homebuy scheme raised the final £30,000 (15%). The builder & Homebuy's contributions act as an equity loan, interest free for 5 years, and also became our 'down payment' so the mortgage loan to value ratio was a happy one, and no deposit from us was needed. 

    At this point, may I please apologise, I realise that I am rather "off topic" but I love to share my story with others, potentially not realising that they may be in more of a position to buy then on first glance. And it must be said that aside from the cases of those mentioned here, many renters do not have the choice; to buy or not to buy, it is a stop gap or a temporary arrangement until such time that they can buy. Plus I agree with Iamcoldsteve ref the fincial position on renting verses buying, long term.

    My mortgage was secured from The Melton Building Society with a mortgage specifically designed for the shared equity scheme, with an interest rate of 4.5% - which is not too shabby I understand.

    There were limitations to the scheme however.

    We had to be earning less than £60K pa and yet still able to prove (beyond merely providing a budget sheet) that we were able to meet the cost involved with home ownership - we endured a rather stringent means test and a lot of intrusive examinations ( I'm sure they also wanted urine and blood samples too!), plus we were limited in the house we could apply for, it had to be a new build property where the builder was signed up to the scheme, and the house itself had to pass a "reasonable" test, so despite having two full time teenagers in the house, and two under 10's on weekends, the biggest property we could get was a modest 3 bed.

    However all this aside, we are now in our own home, living the dream, and loving every minute of it.

    We didn't have to save for years for a ridiculously high and impossible deposit, and we pay no rent for the privilege of living there. 

    After 5 years we have choices; re-mortgage for the remaining £60,000 and free ourselves of the loans, start paying interest on the equity loans buying us more time if needed, or sell up & move on having had a huge hand in the first giant step to home ownership.

    The house may be worth £220,000 by then (ever the optimist!), so we can walk away with our 70% £154K to move to something a little bigger or with period character etc.

    I really feel the hardest step is over for us now, and would urge any wannabe home owners to investigate their options fully before writing off house buying as "impossible". Believe me, it is not.

    Again sorry for wandering off topic. 

     

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Dweller
    Love rating 1
    Dweller said

    This article and a lot of the comments suffer from the usual problems that occur whenever you generalise about these things. The range of properties and situations covered by the statements is so vast it renders the argument pointless. Everyone will be able to cite an example that contradicts the headline; here’s mine:

    I own a leasehold apartment and my mortgage + service charge payments are still up to £100 cheaper pcm than my neighbours pay in rent for an identical or smaller apartment. I have complete freedom to decorate and alter my demise, but any serious issues (roof leaks etc) are not my problem and are resolved within a few days. My apartment is all high spec electric appliances so the ‘boiler packing up’ scenario doesn’t affect me and electrical installations have less to go wrong and are easier to fix.

    For my situation, with the type of property I have it works out cheaper to own than rent and there is very little to worry about. This however won’t apply to every person and every property. There are just too many variables involved to even attempt to write a headline that firmly states one or the other is the best value. 

    You can all do your sums and try and pick at the old service charge/management company bit and point out how your situation that is not comparable with mine is somehow the better way to do “it”. But the fact remains that I did my homework and it paid off, and that’s all anyone can do. There is no one answer to this problem and spending our time debating the finer details of a sweeping generalisation is something of a waste of time.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kittzy
    Love rating 32
    kittzy said

    Oh Pulease

    If over the next few years (3) property falls in value and doesnt recover i will be surprised, if property goes up over the next few years i will be equally surprised.

    In 10 years time property will have doubled, yet again, it could take a little longer due to the strange times we live in but in the LONG term it will happen.

    10 years ago we bought a 3 bed semi with garage and drive, it cost us 70k ( 9 months earlier and we could have got it for 55k), at the top of the market it was worth 160k today its worth 140k so thats about right.

    24 years ago my mate bought a similar property for 25k at the top of the market it reached 160k and today is worth 140k it only has to go up 60k in 6 years to loosely prove the theory.

    Long term, buying is best

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • IFAPaul
    Love rating 2
    IFAPaul said

    The topic is "why you're better off renting" and not which costs more or less.

    Financially, in the long run, if you take out repayment mortgages and pay them off before retirement you will be better off buying.

    It may be that you are paying more per month on the mortgage than renting, however at the end of the repayment mortgage you own the property and therefore have an asset of value.

    By renting you are continually paying for something you will never own.

    You are also generally better off buying as you will generally have more choice, subject to budget, of where to live. Of course there are periods in time where you might be stuck with a property as prices fall but in the long term if you can sit tight it should turn around. Once you have bought a property, until you come to sell the value is irrelevant so long as you can afford the mortgage.

    On the flip side, you will be better, not necessarily better off, to rent if you need to be on the move a lot e.g. due to job.

    It all depends on your interpretation of better off but certainly my view is ownership far out does renting in the better off stakes.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Oh Pulease
    Love rating 3
    Oh Pulease said

    And when, after your latest 2 year fixed rate you go to remortgage, and your valuation comes in £20K lower than it was 2 years ago you are stuffed and getting deeper into debt by the day. Many buyers have bought depreciating assets and are paying interest only mortgages on them at crazy low rates which are about as much as they can afford. So after paying their mortgages (interest only = rent) for two years you find yourself with £20K less than you had at day 1. And still you don't own a brick. In fact you simply own a slowly degrading 'asset' which you also have to pay to maintain. 

    When interest rates rise to curb inflation (and they will), these mortgage payments go through the roof and STILL you own a depreciating asset. When credit distressed people lose their houses then the already oversupplied stock increase further and prices fall faster. It is a viscious circle which is just beginning.

    Duncan Ballantyne once said that when he started out, he went to the bank to borrow money for his first care home. He asked for as much as he knew the bank would lend him. If it would have lent him more then he would have bought two care homes. Why? Because a care home is a business which GENERATES income. A house is a money pit which swallows it. Duncan Ballantyne is one of the UK's richest men for a reason. 

    So is it more expensive to buy or rent? All depends upon your timing. However, the question was asked today. So today the answer has to be renting by far. Once you take into account the state of the market and the state of the economy, there can be only one answer.... for the next few years. Buying a house is a luxury not a necessity.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • mimhall
    Love rating 2
    mimhall said

    I rent because it suits me! I live on my own, work but have arthritis. I don't have to worry about upkeep and maintenance as I have a great landlord.

    I also have itchy feet, so if I want to work in a different part of the country, I can move within a term - impossible if you own your own house.

    I have no particular desire to buy my own place, nor do I feel that I have 'failed' in some way if I'm not a property-owner.

    Report on 16 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • leah AKA global leah
    Love rating 21
    leah AKA global leah said

    First of all, I will apologise for not reading all the messages that's been left, but what I had glance through had got me thinking, a lot of "commenters" are right and wrong over various stuff, but through my own experience, I have to point out probably a few of you have already said.

    I am now living in a council property, which is actually something that hasn't caught my attention with the comments, I have lived in both properties, a private landlord as well as the local authorities. Now we were lucky to find a private property that was pretty cheap a few years ago (£375 every 4wks) while the other houses in that area was around £50+ more. The problem that we had were the landlords would hardly do any repairs to the house, but yet would liturally demand to come into the house every 3mths to look for "damages". At this point I will point out that both my partner and myself were working full time, and hardly ever in the house at w/ends, so the only "damage" we could make was putting fingerprints on the wall. Everything we did in the house, we had to ask for permission, which actually included changing the curtains! My partner was working night shift at the time, so he needed some dark curtains in the bedroom, but it was all "no no no, you have to show us what you will be putting up, then we will let you, otherwise you'll have to leave these light curtains on" I was glad to get out of there when the local authorities gave us a house!

    The advantage of living in a council house is that anything you do IN the house, as long as it doesn't make the house fall down, then it's fine, we have got panel walls, wall tiles, floor tiles, wall papers, just plain paint, clothes rail drilled directly onto the wall, and not having to ask for permission to do that once. Eventually, we will probably buy the property, and it will be a lot more cheaper than houses on the market, and "already done to your own taste". 12 months ago, the council had even done improvement to the house, so now we also have double glazing, new kitchen, radiators and a new fire place, all "free"

    So yes, at the moment, it may seem I'm not keeping up with the Jones because I am not a home owner, but the one thing I don't have to worry about is if there is anything wrong with any big appliances, such as boilers or the door falling off, I know I don't have to worry about forking out a large sum of money to get it fixed. And the rent is much cheaper than renting from a private landlord, considering you are "paying" for their mortgage and if they get mardy, they can throw you out for no reason, whilst at least unless you are causing serious problems with your neighbours, not paying your rent or breaking the house, the council have no reason to kick you out and it's not a short term lease.

    Report on 17 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • houstonstewart
    Love rating 24
    houstonstewart said

    Now this is a long way off subject but should be said and you are probably not going to agree with this leah AKA global leah

    But your viewpoint is PART of the continuing problem of why we are in this property mess. Mrs T kicked it off with the Right to Buy for tenants in social housing and created this situation where people no longer think in terms as 'Council Houses' as that way any more.

    LA Housing was introduced for those who would otherwise not be able to afford to buy or rent privately their own homes for whatever reasons, if they prospered they would move on, leaving the next occupants to take on a LA home. Instead people still see it as a liferaft not to pass on but to purchase when they prosper thus denying other unfortunate people the same opportunity they had.

    Meanwhile Social Housing new builds are not happening and the stock continues to shrink. We have to get back to the original concept of Social Housing and away from the mentality of a springboard to discounted ownership.  

    Oh by the way your: Eventually, we will probably buy the property, and it will be a lot more cheaper than houses on the market, and "already done to your own

    taste". 12 months ago, the council had even done improvement to the

    house, so now we also have double glazing, new kitchen, radiators and a

    new fire place, all "free"

    Its not for free, nothing is for free, if it where, send them around here I'd like some of the same but I think you'll find taxpayers foot the bill.

    So enjoy what you have and when you can afford to buy, do so but don't deny others waiting more often than not, years, the same assistance you no doubt were once very grateful to receive. - Thank you

    Report on 17 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • klooloola
    Love rating 0
    klooloola said

    Some questions I have:

    If the flat you bought is lease hold say 99 years, does it decrease in value 1% every year ? Does renewing the lease cost significant money ? THis a cost we need to factor in the above calculations.

    Most recently built Flats dont look like they will last 99 yeas without needing significant structural repair.

    Report on 17 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Gerard2009
    Love rating 0
    Gerard2009 said

    How do you value the pleasure of ownership and putting down roots. Each to themselves but I know what I'd prefer to do. Landlords are there because there is money to be made from it, simple as that.

    Report on 17 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • leah AKA global leah
    Love rating 21
    leah AKA global leah said

    @houstonstewart  I WAS in the position of buying a private home 15yrs ago until my ex decided to leave me with all the debts as well as a child to look after, I may say above that later I will probably be in the position of buying the house that I am in now, but very unlikely, as it is only another 20yrs before my retirement, there is no way I can save up at least the 10% deposit in that time at all, as I am just about living comfortably at the moment.

    The whole point of this thread is for people to voice their opinion over the pros and cons about renting or buying, and I am sure a few people that read and comment on these threads have lived in private properties and had bad dealings as well as good dealings with their landlords. I doubt very much I would ever be able to afford to buy this house that I'm living in at the moment, and I am not that naive to not know things aren't free, but as it stands, I know for certain I didn't have to fork out thousands for the home improvement that the council had put for the house, so they may be taking it out of the rent, but with the increased rent payment, I am still not missing a large chunk of money if that had been my owned house and I was the one that did pay for the improvement.

    With the recession that went on last year, majority of us are still trying to catch up, I just feel lucky that if you aren't able to make the rent payment that particular month, the council are more understanding than private landlords or the bank, so in that aspect, renting, especially from the local authorities for me at the moment is good.

    Report on 19 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • houstonstewart
    Love rating 24
    houstonstewart said

    leah AKA global leah

    Of course this article was about merits of renting over buying however you introduced the topic of the council paying for your home improvements and the possibility that you might buy your council house, I'll repeat your quote

    'Eventually, we will probably buy the property, and it will be a

    lot more cheaper than houses on the market, and "already done to your

    own taste". 12 months ago, the council had even done improvement to the house, so now we also have double glazing, new kitchen, radiators and a new fire place, all "free" end quote.

    So my point of going back to honouring the purposes and original concept of social housing over the malaise that those who have them can deny others that same opportunity for personal gain and shrink the stock available still stand.

    Report on 19 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • DominicStockford
    Love rating 11
    DominicStockford said

    Let's see - the one of the most wealthy nations (not tiny county sized bit of land that has somehow mysteriously got some level of independence!) in the world is, I believe, Switzerland. And there, with all that wealth, they rent!

    Report on 21 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • riblo123
    Love rating 18
    riblo123 said

    To suggest you would be better off renting than buying (assuming you have the deposit) is nonsense. 

    I agree with all the above pro-buyer comments. An important consideration is that when and if you decided to sell your main residence any increase in value is free of tax (at the moment).

    I agree that in the current economic climate it looks pretty gloomy for prices with the loss of jobs, VAT increase and inevitable interest rate rise. However having been fortunate enough to sell recently at exactly 10X what I purchased for 30 years ago it is an absolute no brainer.

    On the other side of the coin, fewer houses are being built and the population continues to grow = higher rents. Over the long term buying a house with a mortgage rather than paying thousands in rent you will never see again speaks for itself.

    Report on 21 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • fine1
    Love rating 0
    fine1 said

    advice please... just been told i have sold my house and buyer wants to be in within a month - i cant be fussy as the house has been on market for over a year and i am struggling with the debt attached to it. My cicumstances changed radically in the last 18 months due to partner leaving me with all debts and redundancy meant taking a lower paid job - we were mortgaged up to the hilt ! and now my wages do not cover my outgoings. I will come away with about 40,000 after paying off debts - and will be completely debt free. I am so worried that i am going to make myself homeless tho and need advise. Ideally i would like to part buy part rent and wonder if they would take on bad credit (even tho this will be sorted out on sale of house) I need to know of lenders that would take on bad credit. Failing that if i rent for a year - would this repair my bad credit, but this leads me to my next worry - how do you get to rent with bad credit - i will have 40,000 to use and i am in full time employment - any advice would be appreciated - thanks

    Report on 21 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • houstonstewart
    Love rating 24
    houstonstewart said

    Finel

    Without knowing all the personal financial details it is almost impossible for anyone to advise re Mortgages etc, so you must go and see ideally an Independent Financial Adviser / Broker, not one or the other because you need full advice. Also avoid Tied Advisers.

    Regarding renting, which looks like your best route to secure your current house sale. If credit history is a problem you could with £40k in your pocket offer to pay for the 1st 6months rent in advance. This is how I overcame the same problem. Renting will also allow you time to take stock of your finances and give breathing space to decide what you want to do next.

    Good Luck

    Report on 21 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • houstonstewart
    Love rating 24
    houstonstewart said

    Finel

    By 'Broker' I mean Mortgage Broker (Independent)

    Report on 21 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • fine1
    Love rating 0
    fine1 said

    Thankyou I have an Independent adviser coming tonight - Thanks again

    Report on 24 November 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 27Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 27 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.9% to 3.5% (T&Cs apply).

NatWest Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).

Royal Bank of Scotland Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV3