Being a homeowner/mortgage owner vs private renting = homeowner/mortgage owner wins.
Being a homeowner/mortgage owner vs social housing = social housing wins.
And I know what I am talking about. I have been a mortgage owner/homeowner - (I had 3 properties over 20 years,) and I have privately rented - for 2 years back in the late 80's before owning - and then for 3 years several years back.
And now I am in a little social housing home where I have been for 4 years. In a wee cul de sac with 22 properties. Built in the 1970's and with a mix of several small families, disabled people, a few couples, and some elderly people. My rent is £300 a month. (North Staffs, near Leek.) It is the most beautiful place to live; a stone's throw from the peak district, and with the best neighbours ever. 7 of the 22 homes have been bought on right to buy, and the other 15 are still housing association.
We have maintenance done regularly, repairs done often within a week, landscaping done for us, remedial work done every 3 or 4 years on the outside of the property. We have window latches, taps, kitchen unit doors, and roof tiles fixed or replaced, right through to a new boiler or new bath if we needed it. We pay full rent as we work, but if we ever come out of work, we would get housing benefit. We have this tenancy for life. We will never leave.
Many other countries across the globe rent, and no-one cares or looks down their nose at anyone.
And is it bollocks 'dead money?!' I am sick of that shitty old chestnut; change the record.
You are paying money for the rental of the home. You may as well call anything you buy 'dead money' if you are not getting the money back once you have used it/eaten it whatever!
I would never buy again if my life depended on it. I see people around my village having workmen at their homes left, right, and centre for this repair and that repair, getting deeper and deeper into debt for all the repairs that need doing. New roof? 10 grand. New boiler? 3 grand. New bathroom? 4 grand. And so on.............
Every last thing that fucks up, YOU have to fork out for it, whether you have the money or not. If you need 3 grand for a new boiler, do you have a spare 3 grand in your wages that month? No. So you will more than likely have to take out a loan or finance for it. (Coz very few people have savings, and if you decide to buy a house, say goodbye to ever having savings again!!!)
And God help you if you end up out of work/off sick for a lengthy amount of time. My DH went to work through illness, sickness, and depression, because he could not afford to be off for more than a couple of days every 6 months or so.
And I - even though I have always been paid for sick time, I had to return to work when my kids were 4-5 months old as we could not afford to lose my wage because of all the outgoings and costs of 'owning' a home. (20 years ago, maternity leave/pay was only 18 weeks!)
We are both in work - both with full sick pay for up to a year now, but it's a blessing to not have to worry anymore, about losing our jobs/being off work long term...
I know not everyone has the good fortune to rent social housing, but if you do, then go for it.
Hell will freeze over before I buy again. It's no longer the massive money making machine it used to be, and is little more than a ball and chain around your neck. In most cases, when you have a mortgage, you don't have much more security than if you rent.
And the first person to say social housing is subsidised by the taxpayer is an idiot. It's not. People pay rent to the housing association. The tenants 'subsidise' the properties. The homes were built and paid for many years ago by the housing association, and they now rent them to people and do repairs and maintenance when needed.
I re-iterate. Private renting - not keen.
Social housing - VERY keen.
Being a mortgage owner/homeowner - second choice to social housing.
Get on the housing list if you can. But having a load of equity may stop you being offered anything.