To be so annoyed at this woman's financial incompetence

Since when has Hartlepool been a desirable area? It was a shit heap the last time I was there.

That's what those articles are for, to make your blood boil. It's like the slightly more middle class version of the story in the Sun about a single mum spending some of her benefits on beauty treatments. These people are dumb enough to sell their stories to the press simply to be ridiculed and judged. So she earned about a grand just for shaming herself to the DM. And you read the article and shared it.

So what is acceptable for a single woman? A bedsit? A single room in a shared house?

she works for herself so one room is probably her office, one her bedroom and one for guests. Hardly excessive.

Your final comment is just plain unpleasant and unnecessary

The difference between 40k and 100k today is at 40 you share a house with others and at 100k you can own an apartment

This! I wouldn’t wipe my arse with the Daily Mail!

Often you get the crappiest room if you book single occupancy. I felt hotels were taking the piss many times and simply don't like to go anymore.

First poster nailed it. Stop reading trash, you’ll feel much better about the world.

Dogsitting - she must have doggy daycare, and it's v expensive.

That was my conclusion.
If you don't have that in the mix, dogs can be fairly cheap - ours cost us about £200 pcm the pair, excluding kennels when we go away, and the occasional vet bill.

It’s rage bait and you fell for it.

But yes you’re right, she could sacrifice her entire lifestyle and take in a stranger to live in her house - but why should she (slash anyone) work hard at a high paying job in that case?

And how is our welfare state supposed to support the record-high levels of benefits payments if high earners are taken the piss out of for wanting luxuries and deincentivized to work?

But this is mumsnet of course, where everyone is competitively broke.

So it costs more. Which was precisely @Twatalert’s point.

You’ll wait a long time. The flow is currently in the opposite direction between the US and the UK.

Re the holidays, often there's no "single room" supplement anymore because it's no longer relevant unless you're doing a package holiday where prices are based/averaged on two people.

If, as most people do these days, you buy different parts of your holiday separately, you buy "a room" which is usually for two people as few hotels have cheaper single rooms, so there's no "added supplement" as such, you're just buying a room, but paying entirely yourself instead of two people sharing the cost. Same with other aspects such as a hire car, - there are no cheaper "single" person cars. Same with airport taxis. You don't physically pay more, you pay the same, but don't have someone to share the cost with.

You can't be serious? Yes, the food for two people costs more than for one person. You genius!

Two people share the same mortgage, heating, wifi, maybe even car, care for dogs etc.

Regarding holiday, it is not about an obvious single supplement. As a single person you just won't pay half of what a couple pays.

Two years ago I finalised my divorce and moved from Kingston upon Hull with my two golden retrievers to a three-bedroom semi-detached house with an enormous garden, right by the sea, in Hartlepool.

Why though? A single woman doesn't need a 3 bed semi.

Im shocked though that it's only costing her £1K a month in this supposedly desirable area - you would get a one bed flat for that near me. Sounds like a bargain!

She also looks like it would benefit her to cut back on her food bill. Sorry, just saying.

Though I'm not that persuaded by her on that, really. Some of her costs (particularly the food, probably also the cost of travel) would presumably go up considerably for two. I have never actually personally seen a holiday with a single occupancy supplement, so they definitely aren't unavoidable. The biggest issue is having only one person paying for the mortgage, but she did make the choice to live in a three bed house alone.

100k/yr isn't the paradise many think it is. This woman hasn't cut her cloth, but credit to her for setting up her own business and it sounds like she doesn't actually have a salary because of that. This comes with a different layer of risk and I can see how she feels uneasy. I wouldn't go from employed to self employed if it meant the same income.

100k make you comfortable in many parts of the UK, but not in London. I'm frugal myself and made some good financial decisions (one unknowingly but turned out to be brilliant years later). I don't have to worry about eating or heating, but I'm not throwing money around either. I think that if I had a car AND wanted to go on hols twice a year I would hardly save anything. People still think that on 100k you live like a king. You really don't.

She should take in some ironing

I read the article. It doesn’t really seem like she’s saying being a millionaire isn’t enough; rather that there’s a hidden cost of being single vs in a relationship. She lives in an affluent area after all, her neighbours are also going to be millionaires.

Stories like this are just clickbait to goad people into responding

It's ragebait, and an advert for her business. Attention seeking nonsense.

If you google her, she's sold handfuls of these sorts of stories to the fail and torygraph. This isn't her first rodeo.

She's a solicitor but thick as shit, with no common sense, nor financial sense.