How big to buy?

househuntingmad

Hello all. Am in a bit of quandary what to do and need some more rational views before I go even more crazy!

I'm a FTB , have a decent amount of savings and a decent income. In about a year's time I want to start working for myself but buy a house now while I can get a mortgage.

I've seen two properties I like - one is a 2 bed place (160K) and another is a 3 bed (210K).

The argument I'm having is what would be better for the future. The reasoning in my head is : 2 bed would be less deposit and less mortgage, and to a degree less expenditure, but has quite a small kitchen (important to me as I love to cook!) so I could save more for a 'slush fund'. However the 3 bed would obviously be more deposit and more mortgage, but is well set up to consider having a lodger at some point to help with the bills, whereas the 2 bed place it wouldn't really be possible. The other thing is with more expenditure I couldn't consider giving up full time job for longer after.

So would you go for a 2 bed, where you could save more and less costs but a bit more cramped, or take the 3 bed and have more space and more options but more financial considerations?

So far friends and family I've spoken to have been about 50/50 with their opinions so that's not helping me and I really can't decide!

silvercar

I would go for the 3 bed, as you say the opportunity to take a lodger will help if money gets tight. I fear that going for a 3 bed now will mean you want to move sooner, and moving is expensive.

SuzieSue

Go for the 3 bed if you can afford it. You will never be happy with a small kitchen if cooking is important to you.

SuzieSue

silvercar wrote: »

I fear that going for a 3 bed now will mean you want to move sooner, and moving is expensive.

Obviously SC meant going for the 2 bed now.

househuntingmad

silvercar wrote: »

I would go for the 3 bed, as you say the opportunity to take a lodger will help if money gets tight. I fear that going for a 3 bed now will mean you want to move sooner, and moving is expensive.

Very good point - my mum asked me this and my answer was along the lines of I'd probably be fed up with the 2 bed place in 3 or 4 years whereas the 3 bed I could see myself in for at least 5. Also the garden is bigger in the 3 bed place so it'd be worth investing in more.

ellie27

As long as you can comfortably afford it, allowing for interest rate rises etc, then definitely go for the biggest!

Good luck!

gazter

Good plan with the lodger. Theyll more than pay any mortgage shortfall!!!!!!!!!1

Bossypants

I'm going to buck the trend here and say it depends on your lifestyle and future plans. If this is somewhere you plan to eventually settle down and have a family in, then sure, go for the bigger one, but otherwise, think about why you are doing it.

Four years ago I was in your exact position, and I went with the bigger house. It was (and is) a very nice house, and I put a lot of work into making it 'perfect' for me. And it is. It is also far more space than I can occupy on my own, with the associated costs and upkeep (the more space you have, the more you need to heat, clean, light, and the more things can go wrong). I also got a lodger, who is perfectly nice, but I don't really like sharing the way I used to, so now I'm in the process of trying to buy flat half the size which I think I will be perfectly comfortable in, so that I can live there and rent the house out instead.

On the subject of the kitchen, if that's the only thing drawing you to the bigger house, surely there are smaller houses with good kitchens?