20yr old 'owning' £250k house

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

If she is earning £23k their monthly take home will be £3.3k and mortgage at 4% will be £1k so plenty to play with.

If she's earning 23k after just having completed an apprenticeship at age 20, and he's on 27k as a branch manager at age 22, then well done to them. In the north - too. Amazing feat. So far from the norm it's pretty amazing.

But it does dilute the premise of the story somewhat if this is the case. Two exceptionally well paid (for their age and pear group) buy a house with a 50k loan from the governmant.

I'm not sure where you have got 23k from though. Unless you are simply saying "if".

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If she's earning 23k after just having completed an apprenticeship at age 20, and he's on 27k as a branch manager at age 22, then well done to them. In the north - too. Amazing feat. So far from the norm it's pretty amazing.

But it does dilute the premise of the story somewhat if this is the case. Two exceptionally well paid (for their age and pear group) buy a house with a 50k loan from the governmant.

I'm not sure where you have got 23k from though. Unless you are simply saying "if".

I'd agree not a very good example but it does show a more reasonable 2 bed terrace might not be beyond a more typical FTB.

The other thing I would add is Luke Woods asks what he can do as he is spending £1000 renting a 1 bed flat, I would suggest he should move into a house share could save him £600 a month.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I'd agree not a very good example but it does show a more reasonable 2 bed terrace might not be beyond a more typical FTB.

I don't think there is anything typical about these people to be honest.

It's not even typical to be buying at that age - or even thinking about it.

As for the 2 bed, I'd agree, on those wages as a dual earning household, it should be viable. And they'd not have needed to use HTB either, especially considering house prices in their area.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I don't think there is anything typical about these people to be honest.

It's not even typical to be buying at that age - or even thinking about it.

As for the 2 bed, I'd agree, on those wages as a dual earning household, it should be viable. And they'd not have needed to use HTB either, especially considering house prices in their area.

Looking at rightmove in Cheshire http://www.rightmove.co.uk/new-homes-for-sale/property-56242091.html. Doable for people on fairly low earnings.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

Looking at rightmove in Cheshire http://www.rightmove.co.uk/new-homes-for-sale/property-56242091.html. Doable for people on fairly low earnings.

I'd rather see an article based on that to be honest.

At least it wouldn't be pushing unnecessary extravagance. Something which this article clearly does.

It seems so long as the extravagance is mortgage payments and house size, it's perfectly acceptable extravagance. Though if it's a night out in the early 20's - or heaven forbid an ipad.....

Generali

SailorSam wrote: »

Don't you wish you'd bought two while you had the chance.

I have a funny feeling that purch is doing alright for himself.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'd rather see an article based on that to be honest.

At least it wouldn't be pushing unnecessary extravagance. Something which this article clearly does.

It seems so long as the extravagance is mortgage payments and house size, it's perfectly acceptable extravagance. Though if it's a night out in the early 20's - or heaven forbid an ipad.....

I think an article on a more modest house would have been better. If people want to stretch themselves to buy a big house it's up to them. Similarly if they want to spend their money on luxuries that's up to them but you have to realise that if you want something sometimes you have to make sacrifices.

Luke273

ukcarper wrote: »

If she is earning £23k their monthly take home will be £3.3k and mortgage at 4% will be £1k so plenty to play with.
After 5 years the fee on loan will be another £75 a month which will increase by RPI +1% so still doable.

Doable certainly, however it is no doubt pushing the boat. They're at the mercy of external forces such as interest rates, unexpected payments or changes in circumstances.

Basically I always think you can be as risky as you like when it comes to savings and investments, but when taking on huge sums of debt, you should be looking at what you need, what you can afford and minimising risk at all costs. I personally don't think they've achieved any of those, but whatever, their choice and all that.

ukcarper

Luke273 wrote: »

Doable certainly, however it is no doubt pushing the boat. They're at the mercy of external forces such as interest rates, unexpected payments or changes in circumstances.

Basically I always think you can be as risky as you like when it comes to savings and investments, but when taking on huge sums of debt, you should be looking at what you need, what you can afford and minimising risk at all costs. I personally don't think they've achieved any of those, but whatever, their choice and all that.

Even at 8% they would have £1.8k a month after a mortgage so still manageable.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I think an article on a more modest house would have been better. If people want to stretch themselves to buy a big house it's up to them. Similarly if they want to spend their money on luxuries that's up to them but you have to realise that if you want something sometimes you have to make sacrifices.

It's a rather strange celebration article stepping back really.

Gives all the benefits of saving and not splurging. Then goes on to show just how much debt they have taken on to splurge on something well above what they need.

As it's a house, it seems perfectly fine, and celebrated to take on these debt levels to buy something you don't need.

If it were a fast car, luxury holiday or high end tech they had spent their money on, this thread would be very much different with much scorn poured on the couple.

As it's a house far bigger and more costly than they need, were supposed to be in awe that they have borrowed our tax payer money and taken on huge debts compared to their pay to achieve it.