PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Benefits of "starter" home?
Comments
-
With a 2-5 year plan go for it now. That way you've got a home you know is yours - and if your situation changes for the worse all you have to do is keep making the payments and you still get to live there without seeing your "dream first home" slip away from you. This could be the case if you hold out/wait/save and then lose your job, or be under threat of redundancy, and/or have to take a lower paying job.
Once you've a key to your door, any door, you're "safe" in the knowledge that (so long as you keep making the payments) nobody will come knocking to get you out - and no boss can spoil your day by saying "we're considering redundancies" and have you dangling on a string for 6 months until you find out you're safe.
It'll also help you to realise what you want/need from the bigger place in about 5 years' time as you'll have discovered new niggles you never even knew existed before to watch out for.0 -
Some interesting ideas on here, thank you.From the sound of it you are better off staying put - much as i like cycling I'd prefer to walk to work than cycle and location trumps size any day of the week as you can make more efficient use of space but you cannot change a neighbourhood. However moving closer to work would not be so good if the work place is not such a nice place to live - my workplace is out on a suburban business park near the ring road and the nearby houses are nasty barratt style hell holes!
This is true - on my (5 minute) walk home on Friday I was thinking how much I'm going to miss this when I buy! The town centre is completely unaffordable so when I do buy, whether at the "starter" or "dream" level, it's going to involve some sort of commute. But I'd be much happier doing that for a house I love rather than a crappy flat that I don't.Thrugelmir wrote: »The benefit is in your title. It's a "home". Your own little castle where you can escape from the world. Decorate as you wish. Change the layout, the bathroom , the kitchen to suit your own requirements. Now matters more than the future. Anything could happen over the next few years that changes your plans.
Definitely a good point, but if the idea is to live in it for 3 years (already less than I've been in my current rental) and sell it on, I think I'd be loathe to spend any money on it unless I knew it would improve my return. But the "home" aspect is the main reason I want to buy at all! With just me and no plans to have children, I can't see myself moving too many times in my life so the investment side of it is less important. I just want somewhere I can fit an American-sized fridge/freezer
A 50% increase in price over 5 years, when salaries have been increasing by
% per year. Do you think that trend is to continue at the same pace?
I hope not!Would you consider buying your starter home and renting a room to a lodger?
It's not something everyone would want to do but it would help redress the extra cost of paying a mortgage.
I would if I could afford a two-bed. Unfortunately round here I'd be lucky to get a one bed rather than a studio for £250k.exiled_red wrote: »I think that from your original post it sounds like your plan isn't working, the property prices are going up faster than it seems that you are able to save to get your ideal house. Is the 5 years still a realistic timescale taking this into account? If so then keeping with your current plan seems reasonable, but if the rise in house prices means that you are never getting closer to achieving your goal then you need to look at other options.
If you are currently renting then a starter home will enable you to 'save' extra money as you are gaining equity rather than paying rent. If property prices continue to rise, as an owner you are also benefiting from this as well. Obviously there are costs to home ownership compared to renting you have to deal with repairs etc and the costs of buying and selling. I think you need to work through the maths on this, to see what your best options are.
I did the maths last night with aforementioned maths friend but his assumption was that property prices will stagnate over the next few years (his maths so I let him make his own assumptions). He is in the process of buying a house so is relatively tuned into the property market over here, although that's not to say I agree with him. If he's right and prices rise by 0%, then I'm better off continuing to save on a purely financial basis (and we worked out probably happier too), but if they rise by 100% per year then I'm better off buying somewhere immediately. The reality will be somewhere in the middle but without a crystal ball we can't know where exactly and that makes all the difference. On my assumption of an average of 5% over the next 4-5 years (i.e. a slowdown but not stagnation), I would be a little bit better off buying early, but that obviously involves risk.
Oh, and yes, my Plan A (save like crazy route) does take into account house price rises, i.e. I'm not targeting £325k but a little over £400,000. I figure, if my estimate is too low and prices continue to rise at 10%, at that stage I can still buy a starter house!PasturesNew wrote: »With a 2-5 year plan go for it now. That way you've got a home you know is yours - and if your situation changes for the worse all you have to do is keep making the payments and you still get to live there without seeing your "dream first home" slip away from you. This could be the case if you hold out/wait/save and then lose your job, or be under threat of redundancy, and/or have to take a lower paying job.
Once you've a key to your door, any door, you're "safe" in the knowledge that (so long as you keep making the payments) nobody will come knocking to get you out - and no boss can spoil your day by saying "we're considering redundancies" and have you dangling on a string for 6 months until you find out you're safe.
It'll also help you to realise what you want/need from the bigger place in about 5 years' time as you'll have discovered new niggles you never even knew existed before to watch out for.
Your last point is one I haven't considered before so thank you for adding it to the debate! But you mention loss of job etc - my impression was that it would be better renting in this scenario so there's no bankruptcy risk - is that not right? At least if I'm renting I can move out (with a few fees to pay) and crash with friends, but if I can't afford my mortgage I can't do that. I suppose a relatively important point is that I've only been at my current job for a year, but by the time I can buy (whichever route I go down) I should be into redundancy protection territory.0 -
I did the maths last night with aforementioned maths friend but his assumption was that property prices will stagnate over the next few years (his maths so I let him make his own assumptions). He is in the process of buying a house so is relatively tuned into the property market over here, although that's not to say I agree with him. If he's right and prices rise by 0%, then I'm better off continuing to save on a purely financial basis (and we worked out probably happier too), but if they rise by 100% per year then I'm better off buying somewhere immediately. The reality will be somewhere in the middle but without a crystal ball we can't know where exactly and that makes all the difference. On my assumption of an average of 5% over the next 4-5 years (i.e. a slowdown but not stagnation), I would be a little bit better off buying early, but that obviously involves risk.
Oh, and yes, my Plan A (save like crazy route) does take into account house price rises, i.e. I'm not targeting £325k but a little over £400,000. I figure, if my estimate is too low and prices continue to rise at 10%, at that stage I can still buy a starter house!
If there isn't much in it based on how you think things are going to pan out then I guess it just comes down to where you want to be living in the immediate future. If there is very little difference then the savings of not having to move and pay fees etc or repairs on the "starter home" might mean staying with your current plan is the better option.
I would keep checking in on the calculations every few months based on what is actually happening compared to your prediction, so that you know if you are still on track, a faster rise in house prices might mean your dream house is getting further away, while a slower rise (or fall) might mean that you can get it quicker.0 -
exiled_red wrote: »If there isn't much in it based on how you think things are going to pan out then I guess it just comes down to where you want to be living in the immediate future. If there is very little difference then the savings of not having to move and pay fees etc or repairs on the "starter home" might mean staying with your current plan is the better option.
I would keep checking in on the calculations every few months based on what is actually happening compared to your prediction, so that you know if you are still on track, a faster rise in house prices might mean your dream house is getting further away, while a slower rise (or fall) might mean that you can get it quicker.
Thank you, and yes, will do! I think the most important reassessment will be in c. 2 years when I "should" be able to afford the starter home. But I'll keep it all under assessment - who knows, house prices could collapse! (I've just watched The Big Short...)0 -
But you mention loss of job etc - my impression was that it would be better renting in this scenario so there's no bankruptcy risk - is that not right? At least if I'm renting I can move out (with a few fees to pay) and crash with friends, but if I can't afford my mortgage I can't do that. I suppose a relatively important point is that I've only been at my current job for a year, but by the time I can buy (whichever route I go down) I should be into redundancy protection territory.
It depends how you view your prospects and luck.
So long as you feel you can find the money from somewhere to make the monthly repayments you're better off owning.
When it comes to mortgages, if you're in a position to buy and then get put under notice of redundancy you can't get a mortgage ... and if you're made redundant you can't get a mortgage ... and if you're in a temporary or new job you can't get a mortgage ... and if your new job pays less you can't get the mortgage you could've got last year. So, on balance, any job that becomes "unsafe" can have you waiting around for a further 1-2 years hoping to get back to the position you were in before and mortgageable.0 -
Your last point is one I haven't considered before so thank you for adding it to the debate! But you mention loss of job etc - my impression was that it would be better renting in this scenario so there's no bankruptcy risk - is that not right? At least if I'm renting I can move out (with a few fees to pay) and crash with friends, but if I can't afford my mortgage I can't do that. I suppose a relatively important point is that I've only been at my current job for a year, but by the time I can buy (whichever route I go down) I should be into redundancy protection territory.
I don't understand why you think there would be a bankruptcy risk if you owned your own house - rather than renting?:huh: On getting a mortgage these days - it's now the norm to have mortgage protection insurance anyway. If the worst came to the worst and that wouldn't cover it - then one sells the house before it gets to the stage of bankruptcy/pays the mortgage off from the equity and then goes and rents until life is on a more even keel again.
Admitted I'm someone to whom "bankruptcy is not an option/never has been" - but it would be distinctly exceptional for a house not to have increased in value enough that it wouldn't cover paying back the equity and covering the costs of selling it (and that's not to mention the fact you would be paying off some of the loan each month and increasing the amount of equity you had in it anyway). Mortgage payments arent just interest only - unless you were planning on taking on an "interest only" type mortgage - instead of a repayment mortgage. I don't suppose you are in a position where bankruptcy could be imposed on you - ie self-employed and at risk of other people owing you money and causing you to have problems you wouldnt have of yourself?
BTW I wouldn't assume you could always "crash with friends". Life often doesn't work that way. We've only recently had a thread on here of a man that was doing just that - and the friend gave him 2 days notice to get out (as friend wanted to put up a pregnant cousin and her boyfriend instead).
EDIT; Yep....that thread is still running at the moment (ie "Facing living in my car").0 -
A 50% increase in price over 5 years, when salaries have been increasing by% per year. Do you think that trend is to continue at the same pace?
No idea, I certainly never expected the prices to go up the way they have. The prices started to rocket up when help to buy came in, I thought given the extent of the price rises at the time they'd have to come down again, or at least remain constant, but they've just kept rising. I think main factor in the last couple of years is the lack of properties for sale.
I went to register with 14 estate agents in September last year, the criteria was simply one bed flats in the local area and none of them had any for sale at the time. One agent in particular said the price we'd be looking at was around £250k. We phoned them back in January/February time, they still hadn't had any one beds for sale the whole time but said we'd now be looking at £300k+. During that period we did look at 2 properties around the £250k mark but they were very small, I later found out one of them started out as a studio but they put a wall in the middle to make it a one bed.0 -
Logic has had me thinking for some years now (certainly the last 3 years) that a combination of lots more people trying to live in the country but not having a commensurate amount of building done (ie because it has to remain pleasant to live in - or what's the point?) basically will mean the Law of Supply and Demand will kick in.
More people chasing a finite supply of goods and the price of those goods is likely to go up in real terms. Why wouldnt it? Exactly the same applies to houses as that famous "punnet of strawberries" the teacher kept quoting. One person wants that punnet and the price will be the "proper" one. Two people want it and they will compete for it and the price goes up. Ten people wanting what is still just the one punnet and "the sky is the limit" as to what the supplier will charge for it.
Good to know my Economics O level I did years ago came in handy for something - ie learning that sort of lesson:rotfl:0 -
moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »
More people chasing a finite supply of goods and the price of those goods is likely to go up in real terms. Why wouldnt it?
Maybe because demand isn't the only consideration.
If the goods are too expensive for people to pay outright for them, then they must borrow.
If the lenders think the risk is too great, they won't lend, whether that risk comes from price or the % people want to borrow, or both.
That's not my economics lessons talking, but practical experience of 2008. I had a stack of people wanting to buy my house, but they simply couldn't borrow enough.0 -
Hello lovely MSE'ers
I'm picking up this thread again as I've followed the advice previously offered:exiled_red wrote: »I would keep checking in on the calculations every few months based on what is actually happening compared to your prediction, so that you know if you are still on track, a faster rise in house prices might mean your dream house is getting further away, while a slower rise (or fall) might mean that you can get it quicker.
Two things have changed:- I received a 10% salary rise a few months ago and am hoping for another pay rise (likely down to normal 3-4%ish) in about 3 months; and
- House prices at the lower end of the market appear to have started to stagnate in the area I'm looking.
So as a reminder/expansion of the information I previously gave: I was looking to buy in mid-2021-ish (maybe shaving a few months off that) my "ideal" house, which would actually be a normal, non-fancy house in a normal, non-fancy and non-completely crap part of my town. Such house would have cost around £325k in October 2016's money (possible wishful thinking; £350k would have been more realistic). I was wondering whether it would be worth looking at a £250k place (flat, realistically) within the next 18 months or so rather than continuing to save + pay rent for the next 4-5 years.
I've looked again at Rightmove and noticed more flats available at the lower end of the market, and - shock horror - some below the magical £250k mark. And they actually look really nice - at least, some of them do! And they're in the area where the "ideal" house would have been, so no issue with location.
Due to various financial changes such as aforementioned pay rise, a general tightening of the belt and quitting smoking, I'm saving more than I had expected. Especially when you consider that the asking prices for these "starter flats" have started to stagnate. So now it is possible I can afford to buy the £250k-ish flat in about 6 months from now, i.e. a good 6 months earlier than expected.
I'm just wondering whether any of you more seasoned property owners have any additional or new pearls of wisdom for a young'un like me. House prices at the "ideal house" level seem to keep rising, but that's harder to judge really than your bog standard 1/2 bed flat as there's more variation in what you're actually buying.
Do my changed circumstances make it an even better idea that I look at a starter home? Is the current economic/social/whatever climate good/bad for this? Is "sailing close to the wind" financially advisable to get on that darn property ladder?
For what it's worth, I think my attitude is starting to shift so I'm less bloody minded about sticking to the "ideal home" plan than I was during the original conversation.
EDIT: !!!!!!, I forgot a very important detail. The ability to buy this year is only if I take out a less-than-10% deposit. Very quick search suggests we're in the region of 3.75% for a 2 year fix. The "ideal house" plan necessitated a 20%-ish deposit as I just couldn't borrow enough, although that would be in 4 years' time so who knows what rates would be like then.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards