Less mortgage or more London?

(38 Posts)
philbee Wed 02-Oct-13 16:09:01

It looks like we might be able to move out of SE London to Bromley and just about wipe out the mortgage. House would be like for like, hopefully near enough a good primary and good secondary, as we are here. Commute 20 mins longer, and we'd be in proper suburbia, not the kind of inner London suburbia (yes, I know) we are in now. Would you move? There's a lot to do here, DD1 likes her school, we have friends here, it's 10 mins into London on the train. We can afford the mortgage, but it does tie us to earning a certain amount so retraining etc. would be tricky. Is it worth moving somewhere we like less to lose it? What would you do?

DancingLady Wed 02-Oct-13 16:19:38

What would be the benefit in moving, if you're not moving to a bigger place?

Is it for the schools? Curious as I live in SE London too, wondering if you're the same part as me! I'm not mad keen on Bromley - agree the secondaries are good (no idea bout primaries) and I go Xmas shopping there sometime, not sure I'd live there tho...

Ihatemytoes Wed 02-Oct-13 16:59:45

I moved from Hackney, to Catford to Bromley. I like it here. And if I need a fix of "real London" I can be in Victoria in 15 mins from Bromley South.

oscarwilde Wed 02-Oct-13 17:07:42

Do you want to retrain badly enough to move?
Does DD have good options for secondary school? if not, when do you need to be in the catchment area for her preferred choice and how often do appropriate homes come up?

The london market is still rising and inflation %'s are higher in the suburbs closer to the city centre - cashing in your house for a mortgage free future in Bromley or similar is unlikely to be a situation that changes. It's just a question of timing.

I live in SE London too and about 10 mins from London Bridge. We would love a larger house with a garden but the commute gives us a precious extra hour in the day with our kids while they are tiny, and we can be home to whip them out of school quickly if they are ill. It's just a question of your priorities.

I don't "get" Bromley either. Everyone seems to say it is a lovely place to live but every time I go near it, I wonder if I am missing the nice part of town....

..... where do you want your teenage daughter to live? We're planning to move to the Hebrides then. grin

Which house do you think will have gained most in value in 10 years? The South East London one, or the Bromley one?

teatimesthree Wed 02-Oct-13 17:12:24

I was going to ask Quint's question. Also, if you are mortgage-free, what will you do with the 'spare' money (apart from perhaps retraining)? Will you save it? Will that have as good a return as property would?

LibraryBook Wed 02-Oct-13 17:13:03

How much is the move going to cost you (stamp duty, estate agent fees, legal fees, removals etc)?

philbee Wed 02-Oct-13 17:19:13

I think we could buy somewhere (fixer upper probably) for what we could sell ours for less the mortgage we still owe. So we'd have no mortgage or a small mortgage that we'd try to pay off in a few years. Otherwise I'd stay put! But this is all based on right move research, so I may be mistaken smile

ancientbuchanan Wed 02-Oct-13 17:24:40

Er, I live in the borough of Bromley and think it is SE London...

There are few nice central bits, but Bromley North has some v nice houses, Shortlands is nice. Generally there are pleasant neighbours and a sense of community.
But for me it would be about the schools, which tend to be good. It's suburban and pretty stable. Ds finds it knowable and comforting, but he can get to central London with ease for more edginess.

Bromley south has excellent links to Victoria.

It depends where you are coming from and what is important to you.

philbee Wed 02-Oct-13 17:37:29

Sorry, was replying to Dancing.

Timing is probably not great now. We could do more to our house, and DD1 is only in yr 1. It's just the temptation!

Oscar, the DDs have one good option for secondary ad a couple of unknowns, schools which have been poor or are new and have new management. I think they'd be ok growing up here actually as they'd know lots of people and could get into London very easily to go shopping etc. Hebrides sounds good though! I could probably retrain here, and it wouldn't be for four years anyway as DD2 is still too little, she'd need to be at school.

Quint, ours I think, as the area is still changing a lot and we are now awash with posh nosh places among the chicken cottages. Teatime - I don't know! We'd probably spend it on train fares and impulse internet shopping. But hopefully travelling a bit. I guess that just means nicer hols. Hmm. I hope DH would go part time, but not actually sure he'd want to.

Libraryt, am estimating £20000 but prob less. Hmm again.

Ancient, no arguments there. Shortlands is lovely, but not near enough to secondaries. Based on schools and house prices we'd be looking at Eden Park type area. Beckenham also sounds nice but again, not near enough to schools. Should say am basing this idea of the schools on reputation only!

lalalonglegs Wed 02-Oct-13 17:54:13

I'd stay where you are. If you're going to live in London, you might as well live in real London and have everything near at hand.

SilverSixpence Wed 02-Oct-13 19:06:48

We live in borough of Bromley, it took me a while but now I really like it - gorgeous houses in some areas (not that we can afford one!), schools are good, nice parks and v easy to get into central London. There is a lot going on as well and plenty of extracurricular activities for kids.

DancingLady Wed 02-Oct-13 19:38:19

My sister is in Beckenham and loves it, good primaries I think but no idea about secondaries. I find it a bit too 'suburban' and white tbh... Not sure why. It doesn't feel like 'proper London' tho.

greyvix Wed 02-Oct-13 20:11:01

I second the investment point. If you stayed in London, you would have more capital in a few years time, so you could move then.

Mintyy Wed 02-Oct-13 20:13:08

I would go to Sydenham before Bromley. At least Sydenham is more like proper London. Or Teddington?

ArabellaBeaumaris Wed 02-Oct-13 20:13:24

I'd stay put, no doubts at all.

TheHeadlessLadyofCannock Wed 02-Oct-13 20:16:42

More London, any day of the week.

ancientbuchanan Wed 02-Oct-13 20:50:30

If on doubt don't move. The hassle is huge and always more expensive than you think.

But Beckenham is pleasant. One outstanding primary, Clare house, several good ones ( including marian vian which was rated outstanding by ofsted recently). Children go all found the borough for secondary and it's getting better since Harris took over a couple, though both were on the up and one gets quite a fee oxbridge and Russell group places.

But I would stay put on your investment.

GrandPoohBah Wed 02-Oct-13 21:11:11

Don't forget the Langley Park schools also in the Beckenham/West Wickham area.

I personally would stay more London. I moved from Sydenham (zone 3, great transport, London postcode so 'proper' London) to Selsdon and I'm really as far out as I'd like to be. It very much depends on how much your quality of life would be improved by the extra money though.

littlecrystal Wed 02-Oct-13 23:33:53

OP I am considering an almost identical move from SE London to Bromley suburb and yes, I will be moving. But then I have never been a proud Londoner and never liked it much, have been always mad concerned with schools, catchment areas, gangs, fly-tipping, pollution etc. So I love the idea of moving away.

My main worry is the commute and losing everything being on my door step which saves lots of time. So I have plan B in my mind of moving to a small town in East Herts which would be sligthly more out of London, but would have the benefit of having the amenities.

Driz Thu 03-Oct-13 03:06:34

More London, without a shadow of a doubt.

garlicvampire Thu 03-Oct-13 03:17:30

More London. Once you leave, it's near impossible to move back - and the reasons for that are good reasons for you to stay.

Ihatemytoes Thu 03-Oct-13 08:39:02

The OP is talking about moving to Bromley, not the flippin' Shetlands! So hardly "near impossible to move back".

garlicvampire Thu 03-Oct-13 10:10:23

Philbee's looking at two similar houses: one in London, mortgaged; the other in Bromley, mortgage-free. So the value differential is already the amount of their mortgage. Even if prices go up by the same proportion in both places, each increase will widen the differential. It will become more and more expensive to go back, even without life changes that may make it difficult. Added to which, she lives in a gentrifying part of town: that should mean prices rocket much faster than they ever will in Bromley.

They would have to be loads richer to move back in after leaving, while staying longer will afford them more choices in future.

crazyhead Thu 03-Oct-13 11:02:04

I'd wait until I hit an actual point where I wanted to retrain etc to consider this one, personally. Do you have a problem right now with being tied into earning? Do you hate your jobs? If not, there is currently no issue and no reason to move, I'd say.

I do understand what you are saying, we have a house and my old flat (rented out) in north London, big mortgage debts etc, and I sometimes think we'd have a very easy life if we sold up and moved elsewhere - we earn good salaries, but London houses swallow good salaries! But my thoughts are highly theoretical and in reality I think OH and I are both happy and lucky to be in a position we could trade in IF and only IF things changed for the worse.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now