Renters, talk me down please!

lostinrates

OK, I'm having a panic about our decision to rent not first time buy. If we rent for two years (current plan) we'll be in our 30s when buying....not exactly drawing our pension, but still....

Surely by when what we'll want/need will be a bigger property still?

I'm beginning to really sweat about this and I can see why people are just giving up caring about night-sweat-size-debt and walking the tightrope that is affordability.

Although our short term hope was originally to buy in the London commuter belt :rotfl: :rotfl: with the hope of affording a 'pied a terre' to work from in London an a HOME outside Lodon :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: we have concluded we should watch and wait. Now I'm wondering if we should maybe TRY and buy that pied a terre now and hedge our bets? Central London property might hold value better than anything else, an although its a lifestyle we really don't want it might be something we can afford with a mortgage?


The thig that made me think this was a sensible sounding post here, (I'm sorry I cannot remember the name of the Poster or which post it was in:o ) saying if rent would be more than mortgage buy, but if rent less, rent!

It might be that in living a lifestyle we really don't want now we could pay less.....

I'm so confused. Maybe we should see a financial adviser....can financial advisers help with this sort of thing?

Jorgan_2

The average age of a first time buyer is 32, so wouldn't be alone in making the decision.

A whole of market mortgage broker will be able to give you advice as to the costs involved in buying a property, they want give you any advice as to what the right thing for you to do. Only you can make that call.

Changes to the housing market usually happen first in London and then ripple out to the rest of the country.

Dead_Eye_Jones

If you wanna house and can afford it - buy one! If not, then dont. If you want to play at investing then Id pick a different market to gamble on. If you buy a house that you want to live in and have enough money left over for the things you want then does it really matter? One thing most will agree on is that there is certainly no point stretching yourself to the point of misery to buy something you dont really want out of fear.

There are bargins to be had if you look round, I bought very reasonably in 2006 and prices in my London borough havent moved on much further. Most people dont look past the headline houses in the "known" areas though.

Best of luck, at end of the day only you know how important it is to own your own home so only you can answer this...

carolt

Up to you, but I wouldn't assume that London prices will hold their value well; probably the reverse. They certainly didn't in the last crash.

Something to think about.

lostinrates

Jorgan thanks.

Why is it that property increases would hit city areas first? I naively thought that places where employment is likely to be centred would hold value more easily? I can see why they would rse first in cities but am intrigues that they would fall there first! So, historically, where suffers least in downturns?

Rick62

Prices are certainly not shooting up anymore, not in London or elsewhere. So if you wait 2 years you should not lose out and may gain, getting either more for your money or paying less for the same.

If you have found a place that is right for you and is properly affordable then buy if you want, but be prepared for is to be worth less in 2 or 3 years.

neverdespairgirl

lostinrates wrote: »

Now I'm wondering if we should maybe TRY and buy that pied a terre now and hedge our bets? Central London property might hold value better than anything else, an although its a lifestyle we really don't want it might be something we can afford with a mortgage?

I live in central London (WC1). Renting is much, much cheaper than the interest-only part of a mortgage here, so buying isn't necessarily a good option.

geoffky

you know long term that by waiting you will get a bigger bang for your buck..

Sisyphus

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I live in central London (WC1). Renting is much, much cheaper than the interest-only part of a mortgage here, so buying isn't necessarily a good option.

Likewise.. North London. Personally, I've never undestoood the obsession with owning at any cost.

lostinrates

The reason I'm wondering if buying MIGHT work out the same or even cheaper is that we have a sizable deposit. DH and I are going to talk about it at the weekend (he's lodging in London, I'm living with my parents) and I think we'll find a mortgage broker and see what options we have. Of course, buying in London would also mean getting rid of anything other than zone 1/2 travel cards and the majority of our car expences (leaving that at parents house). It might be that we could pay off the place we bought and KEEP IT till he retires -you know, that day that might never come!- and mortgage on a second home eventually, fulfilling our dream, but postponing what we consider quality of life.

Can you tell I'm getting dizzy?!

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.

Phirefly

Dead_Eye_Jones wrote: »

If you wanna house and can afford it - buy one! If not, then dont. If you want to play at investing then Id pick a different market to gamble on. If you buy a house that you want to live in and have enough money left over for the things you want then does it really matter? One thing most will agree on is that there is certainly no point stretching yourself to the point of misery to buy something you dont really want out of fear.

Thanks for saving me the bother of thinking that up and writing it all down