To think renting as opposed to buying is not throwing your money away ?

[Usemyname123]

I am a single 29 year old and do not own a home. I have been told that renting is essentially 'throwing money down the drain' and other words to that effect.
I admire those who are able to save for a deposit as I have a hard time doing so. I think it will take me several years, and I'm single so will potentially be buying something alone.
I think owning a house and being able to have your mortgage paid off so that you can live rent-free in retirement age is the main reason I would buy one.
But sometimes I feel, especially in the UK, that there is this thing about buying a home in order to be complete and fulfilled in life, along with getting married.
I think renting shouldn't have a stigma attached to it, not everybody wants the financial commitment of a house. Personally, I like the fact that I have the freedom to move elsewhere, or that my landlord is responsible for paying for a new washing machine etc.
I don't think that 'just' renting should be seen as some sort of failure, and should be a more celebrated choice as it has many advantages.
However I can also fully understand wanting to purchase a house. It must be a great feeling to know that you are the owner.
Interested to hear others' thoughts.

@Teateaandmoretea you haven’t thought that one through have you? If landlords aren’t buying then more people will need to buy in order to have a roof over their heads.

We rent but are saving to buy. Once we have the deposit, we won't immediately look at buying. We don't know if we will stay where we are right now because of mine and my DH's jobs. In a couple of years, we will likely know more. If we move, buying and then selling in a short space of time would be throwing money down the drain.

I do want to buy before I turn 45 though. I have a decade before then. I want to be in a good position with a house before I start considering retirement.

So I don't look down on anyone who rents. There are all sorts of reasons renting works out better for them.

@dementedma there are some large estates up north that offer good secure private rentals. There are also larger professional landlordong companies in London that also offer good terms (although they tend to raise prices quite often and are more anal about decorating etc than their more traditional counterparts). Not all private rental is insecure and unpleasant. But it is increasingly moving in that direction. The extreme taxtion of the last century coupled with policies encouraging BTL have definitely made things much worse.

I’m so glad we have paid our mortgage off, my husband was made redundant a few months ago, then my son lost his job, my son is now working again. It is a relief to know at least we don’t have rent or huge mortgage to pay.

Genuine question; if we didn’t have private landlords, where would people go who don’t qualify for social housing?

In places that had robust laws to avoid too much individual buy-to-let/absentee landlordism, much privately rented housing is bought by large corporations and the management contracted out to property management companies. This can make private letting much more stable as a large business is much more able to weather blips on the economic map than a LL with one or two properties, streamlines the repairs process, more security for the tenant as there's no sorry, I need to sell/want to move my relative in/you have to allow viewings and longer tenancies.

Teateaandmoretea you haven’t thought that one through have you? If landlords aren’t buying then more people will need to buy in order to have a roof over their heads.

Put quite simply if people buying on average have less money than the landlords then property will be cheaper on average. But like in poorer countries property is cheaper but people still live in it.

Very very simple economics 🙄. And yes, I have a degree in it.

If property ends up being much cheaper and the number of landlords falls dramatically then what about the loss of revenue the government will get from capital gains tax? CGT is worth a shed load to the government- that means our taxes will rise in other ways

mimi are you actually arguing that on balance house prices need to be as high as possible so the government can net maximum capital gains tax? 🤦🏻‍♀️

Not at all- I'm saying that its foolish to think the government wont screw us in other ways if they lose revenue from one stream. This is a Tory government after all and they earnt 9 billion last year from CGT.

Agree totally but I'd rather worry about where people live first and then consider how tax supports that second.

According to the mail today the Tories are considering mansion tax. And not allowing 40% tax relief on pensions. Works for me, the property owning classes who voted for them less so I imagine

My worry is at retirement age.
People in council/HA are presumably a bit more secure but those like us who are in private rented, what do we do?
We're lucky in that it does look like we'll be buying soon but not everyone is in our fortunate position.

For me, it was about security. I rented through private landlords and had really bad experiences and the rent was more expensive than our current mortgage repayments.

That said, I'm not on my own and I highly doubt I would be in a position to buy if I was on my own. I don't think there is an issue with renting, but I can understand the importance of buying - but it's not for everyone. If you're single, no children and you've got a good place and landlord then I don't see the need to buy.

I just wanted to do it mainly so when we're older we will be mortgage free and can leave something behind for our son. No one in my family had bought a house before so it certainly wasn't the thing to do as my mums been renting the same house for 25 years and she's happier that way.

Private renting sucks, as it's not only the insecurity of it, but the cost too. Sometimes a couple of grand each time you move, with property agent fees, admin fees, moving costs, deposit (bond,) and first month's rent up front. Previous landlord does not cough up your previous deposit for a month after you move into your new property. And some of them withhold half of it (or more) anyway for 'cleaning' and 'rubbish removal.'

If you are fortunate enough to get social housing you are definitely onto a winner. Secure property for life, cheap rent (usually,) general maintenance and costly repairs included, no worries about forking out multiple 1000s a year for maintenance, and not trapped in any negative equity.

I think buying a property was great (pre 1990s) as people bought cheap and the house prices rocketed, but it's a fools game now. Spending waaaaay more for a property than it's worth, getting into massive debt for life, with a mortgage you can barely afford, and just scraping by in life, just so you can say you're a 'homeowner,' ergo a better person than someone who rents...

Also, what is this bollux about how you have to keep paying for rent when you're old. Many people will qualify for housing benefit when they finish work/retire. Those who don't, well, they're obviously solvent enough to afford the rent.

What's more, even if you have bought your property, and it's all paid for by the time you're 45-55 ish, you will then encounter a myriad of costs for the continual maintenance and repairs for your house. New roof? 10 grand. New boiler and heating system? 5 grand. New windows? 5 grand. New kitchen? 6 grand. New bathroom? 5 grand. New electrical panel? £650. New garage roof? £1200.

So anyone who is smug about having their mortgage paid for by the time they're 45-55 ish, good luck with the multiple 10's of 1000s of £££ you will be forking out for the upkeep of your OWNED property in your Autumn and Winter years of life! Whilst social housing tenants are sitting pretty with cheap rent, all their repairs and maintenance done, lots of nice holidays, a new car every 3 or 4 years, a decent amount of surplus cash, and NO DEBT!

@Usemyname123 YANBU!

Many people will qualify for housing benefit when they finish work/retire. Those who don't, well, they're obviously solvent enough to afford the rent.
Have you ever heard of the working poor Shinycat????

I do see it as a waste of money but an unavoidable one because gone are the days I had when you buy a house on 3x joint salaries. My first house was 50k in the 1990s so easily affordable unlike now

@Member869894

Of course I have heard of the working poor!!!!!!!

And they will qualify for housing benefit too if their pay/income is low enough.

Lack of critical thinking from you there !!!!!!!!!

Yes technically it is.
However there are huge benefits and I’m glad we rented lots before buying.
I learnt that I could live with DH before committing to buying somewhere together.
I learnt the living costs of living away from parents, again before making a much bigger commitment to a mortgage.
We were able to experience different areas to live in without the astronomical cost of buying/selling and the inconvenience.
We learnt from other people’s properties what our ideal would be and what we classed as wants/needs. Eg parking/garden etc
It took us 10 yrs of renting and saving before buying and although at the time I resented paying out ‘dead money’ to someone else, I am now extremely grateful for everything I learnt along the way.

I would never regard renting as a personal failure. But having no choice but to rent for years and years and years, in the British system of relatively short-term and insecure tenancies, is not a good situation to be in.

If buying a house is reasonable for your personal situation and you choose not to then yes, I think you are essentially throwing your money away.

(That's for private renting. If you're able to get a council or housing association property with the much greater security of tenure they come with, it's a different matter. But such housing has been slashed and burned back to the bare minimum nowadays.)

Interestingly it is only in the last couple of generations that working people have bought their own homes rather than rent. My parents , born in the late 1920’s bought their first home a few years after getting married, late 1950’s and were the first in their family to do so. For the previous generation it was the norm to rent, moving frequently as family grew or landlord started charging too much.
I don’t know how young people will get on the ladder now without really well paid jobs, being part of a couple sharing cost or with inherited money.

Oh dear Shinycat. You can't just ignore those who don't qualify for housing benefit but struggle to pay the rent

I'm 39 and have been privately renting for almost 6 years. My OH is 44. I have two boys and another baby on the way. Both fiancé and I work ft but on low wages so for us, getting on the property ladder under current circumstances is pretty much impossible.

Currently in a three-bed so will be needing to upsize again in the next couple of years or so. We'll probably have to still keep renting.

Our mortgage is £329 a month and we could rent our house out for £700 a month. That saving is worth all the hardship to get a deposit.

I’m so glad I don’t rely on the state to pay my rent, UC is a nightmare, i’ve heard so many horror stories where UC were supposed to be paying the LL direct and haven’t, they have suddenly stopped paying for some reason, sometimes because your wages have been paid twice because the way the dates fall, but they don’t tell you until the day. UC only pay 85% of your housing cost, that will be a hard if you only have a state pension. I want a secure home in my twilight years, I don’t want to be moved from pillar to post when the LL decides he wants to sell.

@RainMinusBow you are going to struggle to get on the property ladder with 3 children, I hope UC help towards your rent, all the best xx