Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think I will never be able to own a house?

141 replies

igetmorelovefromthecat · 25/02/2011 00:25

I am 30, and have been privately renting since I moved out of home 12 years ago. On average, I move once a year due to tenancies ending/houses being unsuitable etc (I am not an awful tenant and have never been kicked out of anywhere in case you were wondering).

I am now renting a lovely house and managed to get an 18 month tenancy on this one but I will definitely have to move at the end of that term as the owners want to sell. The thought of uprooting myself and my two DCs AGAIN makes me want to weep. DD1 is in school and we are very settled in this area which makes things harder as it is only a village and there aren't hundreds of rental properties to choose from.

I am really craving some security and stability for my DCs and have been looking into buying a house. With mortgages being what they are now I would need around £27K as a deposit to buy a very modest house in this area. I am a single parent and I run a small business which is successful but although I can afford to keep my head above water there isn't much left over for saving. I would die of old age before I saved £27K!!

It's so depressing to face a future of moving all the time. I know I'm not the only one in this situation and there are people a lot worse off than me but AIBU to just want to find somewhere to live and be able to stay there?

OP posts:
agnethafaltskog · 25/02/2011 07:51

Well, no, but whilst the deceased parents scenario is unfortunate, you shouldn't be acting in a way that makes your parents kick you out!

Fernie3 · 25/02/2011 07:52

My dad remarried and wanted the room for my stepsister.

alistron1 · 25/02/2011 07:56

Or if your parents split up and don't have room for you, or can't afford for you to stay, or choose to move across the country or to a different country etc..

I was 'going out' with my DP for a couple of years before we moved in together. We moved in together because we loved each other (barf!!) and didn't like being apart.

Of course by getting pregnant within a nanosecond of living together we scuppered our chances of home ownership, but c'est la vie...

Like an earlier poster we rent from a company, and have done for 14 years now so we have a level of security. We are allowed to decorate/furnish as and when we want so it feels like 'home'.

The only way that we could have afforded to buy a house would have been to have the deposit paid by our parents. And even then there's been such a mismatch between income/houseprice that we could have (a) bought a shed or something or (b) crippled ourselves with an unaffordable mortgage.

As others have said private renting needs to be shaken up in the UK to give tenants greater security.

StarryEyedMama · 25/02/2011 07:59

I totally understand how you feel! I've been renting for the 10 years and I'm exhausted by it all. The sad thing is, I know I won't be able to afford a house until my mother passes away, it's so awful that having the security and happiness of having your own home is tainted by death.

balijay · 25/02/2011 08:04

I sympathise with you OP. I had to rent for a while when I was on my own with the DCs - moved into a lovely little 2 bed house... 5 months later I was packing the boxes again as the landlord wanted to move back in Confused I found it horribly unsettling and not great when you have children. No advice I'm afraid apart from maybe buy a lottery ticket and keep your fingers crossed?!

oxocube · 25/02/2011 08:11

*YANBU but ... why not buy a home before having children?

Boyfriend and girlfriend live at home with parents to avoid paying rent, make some sacrifices to save for a deposit, buy house, do it up, save some more for a rainy day and then start a family.

It's what we used to do in th'olden days.*

agnethafaltskog, I am shocked by this post. You have absolutely no idea of the OP's personal circumstances and make her sound feckless and irresponsible Shock

Incredibly judgemental Angry

agnethafaltskog · 25/02/2011 08:36

My comments weren't directed at OP in particular but at all the whingers who have children before saving for a house and then start banging on about the injustice of it.

And as for being "judgemental" - this is AIBU, you know, so OP should expect opinions and even to be told that she (and other contributors to thread) are being unreasonable.

Hammy02 · 25/02/2011 08:45

Agnethafaltskog-I agree. I would've thought it sensible to get yourself into a stable situation before having kids-especially if you think owning your own home is important. Although obviously I don't know the OP's position before having children.

FruitSaladIsNotPudding · 25/02/2011 08:50

Do the maths agne - in the olden days people would perhaps have to live with their parents for a few years at most to save for deposit.

Now house prices are so high in terms of multiples that you would be living with them well into your thirties, waiting for your life to start while your fertility waned. Assuming your parents even wanted you to live with them. Mine wouldn't have, although they love me and we have a good relationship. They want their life and want me to have mine.

ccpccp · 25/02/2011 08:53

"But I agree don't expect condems to help!"

Not directly, but condems have implied that they think house prices are too high and will not be protecting homeowners as the previous administration did.

House prices should have been falling since 2007, and it was Labours direct intervention that stopped this decline. A voter with a lot of equity in their house is a happy voter.

Wait till interest rates start creeping up, and there will be some big price falls. A lot of homeowners are living on borrowed time, cruel as that sounds.

tyler80 · 25/02/2011 08:58

YANBU

Yes, home ownership is not a right but alongside this there should be a reasonable alternative, ie. secure, long term tenancies.

We are lucky, after moving out of our last house because the landlord was selling up, our new home is owned by a company speculating on the development of land behind (they'd need to knock the house down to gain access). But this is at least 10 years down the line so we're unlikely to be asked to move on.

To those who say "do what of did in the olden days", I'd be quite happy to move back home with my parents for 3 years if I could then buy a house on 2.5 times my partners (the male) salary only!

With the way interest rates are and the tightening up of lending criteria it really feels like you're fighting a losing battle sometimes. In this area even a 100% mortgage would be less than we're paying in rent, but of course they're not around any more. So we have to pay more on rent than a mortgage would cost and save for a deposit at the same time.

PlanetEarth · 25/02/2011 09:00

FruitSalad, depends what you mean by "the olden days". 10, 20, 30 years ago, maybe. But before that surely only a minority were home-owners, most ordinary people would have rented all their lives.

According to this site, "In the early 20th Century, less than 10% of all homes were owner-occupied, but by the early 21st Century, this figure had risen to 70% - just above the EU average."

foreverondiet · 25/02/2011 09:00

YANBU.

All those moaning about the Condems, remember this house price boom happened under the labour government, basically because they let the banks "get on with it" and lend more and more money, all parties as bad as each other.

In terms of renting, need to try and choose house where the landlord agrees (even informally) to longer term, we have been in current house for 3 years, and landlord happy with us there longer term.

In terms of saving up before you have children, nice idea but doesn't always work in practise, eg my parents live in Scotland my job was in London.

FruitSaladIsNotPudding · 25/02/2011 09:04

Planet - of course that is true. And it would be fine to go back to that level of home ownership again, if tenancies are secure.

But as others have said, it's not the ownership that we want, but the security. And I believe that should be a right (barring bad behaviour etc obviously).

tyler80 · 25/02/2011 09:11

A lot of it is down to luck rather than judgment.

Had I been born just 5 years earlier I'd have escaped tuition fees and been in a position to buy in 1999. We're going to look at a house this weekend - £110,000, in 1999 the same house sold for £39,000

Some people have to move away for work, some people don't meet partners until they're in their 30s, I don't think these people should be denied a right to a secure home. I'd be happy for a change in tenancy law to provide this security, I'm not desperate to own.

justalittleblackraincloud · 25/02/2011 09:12

We're in the same boat here, it's just never going to happen.

But I think I've made my peace with it to a certain extent, and try to keep the positives of renting in mind.

Flexibility to move if/when you need to - so many friends are stuck living where they are living because they are in negative equity, with absolutely no way of doing anything about it

No hefty repair bills to consider - my Landlord recently redid our guttering and porch at no cost to me

It is possible to rent for longer than a year at a time, but I think it comes down to luck. We were planning on staying in our first house indefinitely, but the landlady decided to sell after 12 months. We moved here expecting the same and panicking everytime the landlord got in touch, but we've been here for 4 years next month.

We need a bigger place really, so once our finances are looking up, we can move. Yes there are costs involved, but nothing like the agro involved with buying another house. If we had bought this house, we could possibly be in negative equity and be stuck. And even if we weren't, I'm now a SAHM...so how would we get a mortgage on what would have to be a £185k house with an income of £25k?

PlanetEarth · 25/02/2011 09:16

Yes, tenant security is a problem.

Maybe we need some kind of government control linking house prices to wages instead of leaving it to market forces - can't see that happening though, short of a revolution...

I don't agree with measures such as bigger loans/grants/shared ownership/tax relief on house buying as I think these measures just keep prices high.

Sinkingfeeling · 25/02/2011 09:19

Have you looked into shared ownership, OP?

FruitSaladIsNotPudding · 25/02/2011 09:25

That would be good Planet, but you're right, I don't think it will ever happen.

And agree that shared ownership/giant mortgages etc are utterly shit ideas that artificially inflate the market and are of no benefit to buyers. But desperate people will grab for these schemes as a way to get security.

I think the government should regulate the banks when it comes to lending - so no more than 3.5 x single salary + 10% deposit. More than that is a stupid amount to borrow anyway, and it would bring house prices down to a reasonable level. But of course that is what is happening at the moment anyway.

socka · 25/02/2011 09:36

Do you have any stately homes near you which own the surrounding villages? No idea if it's common or not but where I lived there were many people living in long term lets thanks to this

amothersplaceisinthewrong · 25/02/2011 09:39

I wonder how my 2 dcs (22 and 20) will ever get on the housing ladder as you would need around a £30K deposit at the moment for the smallest of properties in the area we live in. Unless they inherit some money!

PlanetEarth · 25/02/2011 09:39

Didn't they used to regulate mortgages? For whatever reason, they used to be much stricter - when we bought only 12 years ago it was 2.5x joint salary or 3x single salary and that was that. And when my parents bought I think you had to have been banking with them for some time, and personally known to the bank manager.

My parents worked at a school in the 1960's where the headmistress couldn't get a mortgage on her own account as she was single, and they didn't lend to women. Her dad had to guarantee it! Shock (Think that would be another thread though!)

Honeybee79 · 25/02/2011 09:41

YANBU. I feel for you.

agnethafaltskog - I hear what you're saying but sometimes it's just impossible! I live in London and will NEVER be able to afford a house. I earn a good salary, as does DH, but a 3 or 4 bed house with a bit of outside space round here is about £550, 000. No one can help us out with a deposit and we'll just never be able to afford it. I don't get how people do to be honest! So we live in a 3 bed ex local authority flat. No garden and a bit grim. But such is life and we do own it.

FruitSaladIsNotPudding · 25/02/2011 09:45

I think they did. I'm not sure when that changed, 10 years or so ago? There was a time when people were getting 6/7 times salary on self certified mortgages. Crazy, and it pushed the prices up.

If the banks continue to limit mortgages to sensible levels, and I hope they do, prices will fall. I know that will leave some homeowners in trouble, but what else can happen? The current system is unsustainable.

LisasCat · 25/02/2011 09:56

To those people saying we should have stayed at home until we'd saved enough to buy, you are joking right? With the current house prices vs. salaries, most people would still be living with their parents in their 40s in order to save the deposit. That's simply not a practical suggestion, with or without the rose tinted spectacles of 't'olden days' on.