We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

£25k off the mortgage or Buy to Let?

I owe about £96k on a £100k 35 year mortgage (33 years to go at 3.8%), fortunately now I can overpay my mortgage and not have to pay a penalty.

What is most likely to return the greater yield, a £25k overpayment now saving me £44k in interest alone, or a buy to let property?

I’ve always wanted a second house as a very long investment, and here in Liverpool the rental costs are disproportionate to the house value. E.g. a £130k terrace house will rent out for £800 in a decent area.

For the sake of simplicity lets ignore the threat of bad tenants and extras like landlord insurance; I can work out the finer details later – but what would you do and why?

Comments

  • Annisele
    Annisele Posts: 4,835 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    What I would do would depend on my other assets.

    If I didn't really have any other assets, I'd *definitely* use the money to reduce my own mortgage. A buy to let would mean borrowing more money to invest it all in one asset class (residential property), and from a diversification perspective I find that quite scary.

    If I did have other assets, I'm not sure. I'd want to work out the after-tax return I'd be likely to get on the BTL, taking into account things like the risk of bad tenants.

    If you assume two months worth of void periods a year and no expenses (both horrendously unrealistic assumptions), your £130k terrace would give you rental income of £8k a year - a yield of about 6.2%. If you're a basic rate taxpayer, then you effectively get about 4.9% before taking the mortgage into account. Given all the risks, I don't think that sounds all that attractive - but then in general I'm fairly risk averse and I'm not a fan of borrowing to invest.
  • Thrugelmir
    Thrugelmir Posts: 89,546 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    RocketPig wrote: »
    For the sake of simplicity lets ignore the threat of bad tenants and extras like landlord insurance; I can work out the finer details later – but what would you do and why?

    Only speculate with what you can afford to lose.

    By owning a second property at the current time. You are exposed to high degree to both interest rates and house prices. Interest rates only have one way to go and house prices are at best stagnating.

    So , personally, I would take the safe option of a guaranteed return by saving interest on the current mortgage. You can always buy a second property at a later date. When the property market and the economy is in better health.
  • kidmugsy
    kidmugsy Posts: 12,709 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Are you feeling lucky?
    Free the dunston one next time too.
  • dimbo61
    dimbo61 Posts: 13,727 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    you do not give your income, equity in your current home, age, savings, job + job security!!!
    being a landlord is not an easy way to get rich and please take Homes under the Hammer with a huge pinch of salt!
    old repeats and same with Location, location,location.
    Old terrace houses in liverpool are just that OLD they need a lot of money spending to bring up to a good standard
  • holly_hobby
    holly_hobby Posts: 5,363 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    edited 4 November 2012 at 11:40AM
    To be fair OLD doesn't necessarily and automatically mean its dilapidated or below a good standard of decoration or maintenance ... be that in Liverpool or anywhere else, but appreciate the point being made !

    OP if you elect to do this, and my own preference would be to have a good think about this due to risk exposure of an uncertain market, and the ill-liquidity of property investment (ie you may not be able to access your capital when reqd, and may have to dispose of the property to do so, which brings its own set of loss factors for a quick sale if necessary).

    If you elect to go for it, then my own advice would be to look at South in the City, at properties that are immediately habital (ie functioning utilities as a basic !) - if you are considering student let ( due to the high student population there), beware that the majority of BTL lenders don't like this .... also as discussed, you ned to look at your true yield here, thats after all expenses have been applied to the rental income, such as mge payments (only the interest element is a permitted tax dedution), management and maintance costs, emergency and contingency fund, landlords ins, deposit protection - many of which are permitted tax deductions, BUT still need to be paid from the rental income recd - and thats before you get into your responsibilities as a landlord (which if you are working, you may want to employ the svcs of a letting management company to administer for you).

    Hope this helps

    Holly
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.5K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.6K Life & Family
  • 259.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.