Is it wise to buy if you have no heirs?

MovingForwards

I'm going to be buying, with no kids now or in the future to leave it to, because I don't want to be retired and trying to find rent money and / or having to move.

bertiewhite

I've always been of the (maybe simplistic) opinion that my mortgage payments can come down and it will eventually be paid off by the time I'm retired.

If I was renting, it's more likely to go up than down and I would still be paying rent until I die.

steampowered

Financially, the answer would depend on your life span.

If you were only going to live for 5 years after retiring, you'd be financially better off selling the house and living it large for 5 years.

However the average UK life expectancy is 81 years, and that's likely to go up, so you might expect to be retired for 20+ years.

20+ years of paying rent would buy a lot of house! And you'd have a real problem if you got to 85 and the money ran out!

Given that sort of timescale, most people are going to be better off buying.

lincroft1710

Bought my first house over 40 years ago when single.

kerri_gt

SarahLu wrote: »

I completely agree. Do you have any advice about what the other options are if you don't leave your house to your kids?

Sell up, spend the equity travelling round the world while still able with final stop being Switzerland.

Slithery

If you're never going to need the space then buy the smallest place that's comfortable, then pump all of your spare money into your pension(s).

You will get massive tax benefits plus free money from the government. My biggest regret is not starting a pension until 40. By the looks of things I'll still have 50 years of maxing my allowances before I retire.

getmore4less

Simple long term

buying is cheaper than renting if you are paying(works a bit different on benefits)

EOL is the hard part but whenever you sell up you are just where you would have been had you been renting, just with a load more money.

Marvel1

Never entered my mind when I bought single and still single, if anything I'm glad I have.

zagubov

It seems like a no-brainer. You've got to rent something AND you've got to pay off a mortgage.

If there was a stable well-provided housing association /council house stock available we'd have choice, but instead we're relying on an extremely amateur private sector channeling the characteristics of house Hufflepuff for competence and Slytherin for avaricious price-gouging.

So renting a house is likely to be painful and unrewarding (except to the landlord). You'll be spending your pension on your landlord's mortgage.

You'd be better off renting the money to buy a house now in the hope that house price inflation and real inflation erode your debt and inflate the value of your newly-acquired asset. You may then be able to use it to fund care or even a good retirement somewhere warmer cheaper and nicer in your old age. You could even change its layout

And that chap on the website makes good sense but he lives in a country where land and building materials are cheap outside the big cities.

FreeBear

Mutton_Geoff wrote: »

I am approaching retirement, never married, never had/wanted kids.

I still have some way to go until I retire. Never had the urge to get married or have children (can always borrow someone else's if I need a reminder as to why). Own my own house, and can do what I like without having to seek permission from anyone including a landlord.