to own a property you have to work before children

[oohlaalaa]

My cousin was bemoaning the fact her and her husband are still renting, my mum said to me after that's what happens when you have children young. She should have worked for a few years first, to get savings / mortgage.

My cousin did a degree in social work, and as soon as she graduated she and her now husband got engaged, travelled for six months, then married, and soon after that had two children. They had their first child at 23 and 24. He works full-time, but not in a very well paid job. Cousin has two lovely children and works part-time as a carer. They live in a sweet little cottage, and although they have to be frugal, always seem very happy.

Is my mum right? My mum feels that her niece should have worked and saved for a few years, before children. Mum's view is that her niece chose to have children young, and so has to accept renting for foreseable future.

My mum and Dad married at 21 and 22 respectively, but delayed children till they were 29 and 30. My parents reckon this was the best decision they ever made, as they paid off a large chunk of mortgage (my brothers the eldest and he was born in 1980).

I've been broody for years, but DH has kept delaying children due to finances. He has agreed to start TTC next year though (I'll be 29, and he'll be 34).

Do you agree with my mum, or is she being judgemental?

MillyR you are quite right; if owning is very important, then re-location (regardless of other ties) is possible.

caramelwaffle I'm watching it! Unbelievable. I thought my preferred area of my city was overpriced!

All I need to do is save up £100k...

Vile.

But then I would rather gnaw every appendage off than live in Lahndon.

What will happen when this generation of 20-somethings and subsequent generations, for whom, in the main, homeownership is just not a possibilty reach retirement age? As well as the ticking pensions timebomb, are we also looking at a housing benefit timebomb when they can't afford inflated rents on their pensions?

caramel no it's not: there is no otehr school in Wales like the one my disabled ds1 attends, I do not class wrecking his chances of independence as within the realms of possible. Not triggering yet another regression in ds3 through a move from his sn school either.

I suppose physically yes- morally and psychologically nope.

Milly did the operation help? I remember his redundancy but missed the rest. I am sorry, it sounds like an awful time.

When Dh was made redundant he was lucky in that he had a hobby business going, only enough to cover his interest but we realised the chances of his returning to his field were slim (basically three companies merged and moved to the other side of the UK) so he started university; the business is now starting to be something hopeful and he is entering year 3- a much happier and healthier man.

I hope your DH finds the same thing happens.

crazy will the next generation retire, or just work until ill health forces them to stop?

Certainly my father is working past retirement now (his pension collapsed) and Dh expects to do the same; should I get my business idea going (50/50 chance) then I would stop only if I had to for family or health reasons.

I suspect that will be a norm.

peachy If owning a house is more important than any other consideration then it is possible to own a house by re-locationg. You - like I - have chosen to put the needs of a child with specialist needs above living in a different area.

If owning a house is more important to you than ANY otehr thing you are eitehr very young (and unlikely to be on MN) or sick.

OTOH if it is quite important you will move if you possibly can.

I doubt anyone here would sacrifice everything else for a house, it seems such a bland, generalised and pointless comment.

There's one thing which hasn't been mentioned on this thread yet and that's the temporary/short-term contracts often the only available employment of the young (and no longer so young)! Even if I had the deposit, which I don't yet, I would be laughed out of the bank if I asked for a mortgage. The longest contract I've had in a job which was supposed to be permanent was 2 years. After that I've had two 1 year contracts with the same employer, last contract I was offered was for 6 months. And its not like I'm a contractor!!! I'm not grumbling about this really, just saying its a major factor in why I wont be given a mortgage anytime soon.

As for upping sticks and moving north, I could do that, however, my dp's line of work is London based (not a banker!) so we've moved outside of London instead to save on rent and commute in. I think we all do the best we can within our own circumstances and one persons solution can't fit everyone.

A lot of young childless people say they want to own property, on low to mid wages, and also remain living close to family/friends, in Very high price areas.

If owning a property is important, then a new, cheaper location is the option these days.
As you say, in my position, older, with a child with special needs, options require weighing up; choices become more restricted. However, they still are choices.

Caramelwaffle as I said in my post moving to somewhere cheaper is also contingent on availability of work. And that the work one can get is permanent so that the banks will lend to you in the first place!

Also commuting costs etc aren't exactly pennies these days either so if your having to fork out god-knows-what in train fares you may find that your no closer to your deposit savings goals either, or indeed that your smaller mortgage means little because your total outgoings are huge with commuting costs.

Obviously getting people's ideas about how one can get onto the slippery housing ladder is good but from where I stand its not as easy as some posters are making out!

Another reason would be childcare- sister works shifts and has to rely on family for the hours she works (her DH often gets called away for long stretches abroad)

So moving away wouldn't be an option at all unless she was going to pack work in, even a Nany would be reluctant to do the 3 day stretches and 18 hour days sister asks of Mum. And without her job no mortgage would be forthcoming.

I'm lucky of course; I am not in the SE. But even where house prices are low it's often ahrd, as wages tend to reflect that- when we moved here DH ws offered the work he was doing elsewhere (transport manager / planner) for wages circa £15K: not a chance, and not exactly a mortgageable wage even with S Wales prices! Was much more profitable to commute long distances even with a second car needed and bridge tolls.

to go back to the initial post, your mother played a dangerous game - imagine she had waited all that time and then had difficulties in having children?
My parents were married when they were 20/22, and managed to save for 8 years whilst being told they were infertile, but they finally managed to have children when my mother was 29. If she had waited till she was 29 to start trying she would likely of had no children. Is it worth the risk? is owning a house more important than children? I don't think anyone should take things for granted, especially not fertillity.

I think my grandfather waited until he was 40 to marry. In 1901 he lived in a house with 26 other young men (!) the census says. My parents married and did not have children for 8 years in part because they were saving up to buy their own house, qualifying etc. It has always been hard but the difference today is that many many more people expect to buy than the 10% or whatever it was in the 60s who ever had a hope of it.

I have been very very surprised at the availability of mortgages, % you can borrow etc.

I think it's easier to save if both of you are working and no childcare costs. It never occurred to me to have children until I had my career on track and was financially stable.
I agree with those who say our property owning obsession is silly, but if you do want to own a house or if as a woman you want to be financially independant you have to work for a while before having kids.

BAck in the sixties Xenia people had the option of secure state housing, my home town was 90% state housing due to the nature of the industry it supported and most people would walk into a flat when they married and then get a council house when they had kids. Working people.

In the eighties / nineties most were sold off and I remember my friend's older sister being stuck on the waiting list and living with her Mother and her new DH, things just got harder from then.

Now you get a secure tenancy in a council house (that's changing but even then it will be more secure than open market rentals) if you are in severe need and probably only if you are in emergency accomodation, a tenancy with all the worry and insecurity that entails, or you buy.

Things are very different.

JasmineRice Thepower, renting is not cheaper. Our mortgage on a 3 bed semi is 150 per month, if we were renting it, it would cost at least 1500 per month. Even if interest rates went up to 6%, our mortgage would still be less than renting, at around 850 per month.

I wonder if you have actually worked out how much you have paid to live in your house? Buying costs, repair costs, mortgage repayment costs..and how much of your house YOU ACTUALLY own?

I don't think the statement your mum made is quite right. I don't think you have to work first and then have children to buy property. However, if owning a house is v.important to you then it's something you should consider when deciding to have children.

We've done it the other way round, but then we're lucky to live in a comparatively cheap location whilst both earning wages that are above average for the area. All this talk about moving to somewhere where you can afford to buy is fine but ignores the fact that local salaries/job availability and local house prices go hand in hand. We've managed to buy but bought at the cheap end of the market, average householder income wouldn't get you a mortgage for even the cheapest properties.

Incidentally some of the properties listed as cheap earlier in the thread are advertised as cash only/auction properties so unlikely to be suitable for anyone of limited means.

Who cares about OWNING property?

I'd rather have kids of my own than property! Good luck to your cousin!

I wish we'd rented. We are set to inherit not one but two 4 bed homes in the south of Ireland where we can retire, there was no need for us to buy but we bought a 2-bed fixer upper in 2005 in an area that seemed superficially excellent to us as foreigners - two outstanding primary schools and an outstanding secondary school within 500 yards, close to a Park and ride, Waitrose/Sainsbury's/MS within 5 miles to the south and rolling hills and dales 5 miles to the North, local wildlife treks etc, bordering one of the wealthiest areas in our area. However, as foreigners, despite believing we had done our homework, we misunderstood the school catchment area system and we didn't spot that we are just outside the catchment lines for the 2 outstanding primaries and didn't realise that two of the houses within a half mile radius house drug-dealing gangsters. It just didn't have the development potential we hoped. Luckily we only took a mortgage of £90K of which we have paid off between 15 and 20, and it has been a lovely place to live for the last few years despite the apparent downsides now. I just wish we didn't have to go to the effort of selling it at a loss, albeit a small one.

Have you asked an AIBU question here?

Your mum makes sense: they had children young which meant that one partner's earning potential was lower so they had less opportunity to save for a deposit and would not be able to get as large a mortgage.

She's not exactly offering advice though, and "you made the wrong choices so live with it" is a rude and unhelpful thing to say.