relocation to UK 120k household income

[homealone2022]

Hi,

Currently live in a different country but DH has just been offered a post in London with an annual salary of 120k. The post looks really interesting but we've heard that London is very expensive so not sure whether it would be enough for our family to live on - it would be DH, myself and our seven year old son. Would anyone have any pointers as to whether it's enough and what we can expect? Thank you

Dont forget - single earner on 120k gets hammered on tax due to loss of personal allowance band.

Yes, there's a nasty chunk of income just over £100k where you lose your personal allowance at a rate of £1 for every £2 earned, so you are effectively being taxed at 62%. If you can afford it at all and are eligible, far better to put that chunk of money into a pension.

The numbers really are different for expats on shorter term moves. I've told people not to move to the US for salaries quite a bit more than we make. There's a big difference between being able to make it and it being worth upping sticks and moving countries for. On top of that, expats are coming in with no ties to the property market and for shorter term moves they're looking at renting. Everything winds up costing you more, because you're not familiar with the shopping or how to get the best deals on anything, and you've got to deal with the costs on either end of the move. And let's be honest, you're not going to make this sort of move and then move to Newark.

Given that you need to take schooling into account, I'm not sure it is enough. State schools don't HAVE to take you in just because you live in catchment. That's assuming you're entitled to it. If the local authority do find you a school it is very unlikely to be anywhere near your home. But even most of the London private schools can be difficult to get into so research that BEFORE you land in London with no school to send your child.

I don't think the 20 grand wages are being topped up by 100 grand!!

OP's child is SEVEN. They won't have nursery fees! Read the post.

Why are people suggesting SW London for a commute to Liv St?

I'd go for Islington (Highbury or Arsenal), Hackney (Stoke Newington or Dalston) or Bethnal Green. Or Greenwich or Black Heath

We lived in Bethnal Green when we were in our 20s and both single and DH needed very quick access to Liverpool St. This was 25 years ago though. Now it's super-hipster round there, in the way Hoxton and Shoreditch have been for some time. Nothing wrong with this at all, but it's a different vibe to SW London, let's be honest. My teens go to Brick Lane all the time for the various "pop up" cafes and shops. It's a more young persons, edgy vibe round there. Quite different to somewhere like Putney or Barnes! Families come to SW London for a less intense, family-orientated vibe; green spaces and consistency of schools.

Putney is on the District Line and loads commute to the city. You can get the mainline train direct to Waterloo (15 mins) and then one stop on the Waterloo and City Line to Bank. From North Barnes you can just walk over the bridge to Hammersmith (District and Circle Lines, Metropolitan Line or Piccadilly Line). 30 mins to Liverpool St. Or for those more in the Barnes Village / Mortlake side, just get the train from Barnes or Barnes Bridge stations into Waterloo which again, is 15-17 mins (one stop past Putney) and then the Waterloo and City. Trains are every 10 mins if not more. Loads of people commute to the city. The OP says her DH would only need to go in 'sometimes' anyway?

Sorry, it's the pink Hammersmith and City line from Hammersmith (obs) not the Metropolitan which is the purple one.!

Finally some common sense from @Clymene

I'd also add Wapping and Bow to that list.

Everyone is entitled to education pre 16 (post 16 is different)
The LA have to offer you a place within a reasonable distance or fair access applies
There are a surplus of primary school places across London. Lots move to prep age 7 and some of the most desirable London state schools have spaces in KS2 for the first time in 20 years at the moment.

I suggested Islington too! If you're only living in london for a couple of years and your child is primary age, I don't know why you'd want to be further out.

I live in a leafy SW london part now and it's lovely, but if I only had a couple of years in london I'd want to be more central and not be wasting so much time on the tube or train!

Highbury fields is decent enough and walks along the Regents Canal, and it's not far to Hampstead Heath on the overground. Worth it for the very easy commute to Liverpool Street and being able to walk to the British Museum/wherever at the weekend.

I agree with Clymene about not going far south west- of course it can be done, just not sure why you would in OP’s situation. (Different if you’re here forever.). I’d go up the northern line- Islington, Highgate, Hampstead (may be over budget). Also not sure why people are suggesting eg Knightsbridge 🥴

25 years is a LONG time, especially around E1/E2. Plenty of families around Bethnal Green / Columbia Road / Victoria Park. Compared to Putney and Barnes, yes it's hipster (but not really) - not a branch of Joules or Oliver Bonas in sight (hurray!) - but in reality the hipsters moved out years ago to Hackney Wick and Fish Island. Plenty of green space (Victoria Park anyone?). Even some outstanding schools. And no Brick Lane isn't overrun with teenagers. Far from it, the Joules crowd are creeping in unfortunately. And many many tourists.

As for Families come to SW London for a less intense, family-orientated vibe; green spaces and consistency of schools, you mean so it doesn't feel like living in a city right? Maybe the OP actually wants to feel like they're living in London? You know, a city! It's a job post for her DH, not a forever move. People seem to be failing to understand this (perhaps they've no experience of being an expat).

Why are people suggesting areas in the S or SW when Liverpool St is in the East? OP should be looking E or NE at areas like Walthamstow which is full of people commuting to LS as the train takes about 15 mins.

Areas such as South Tottenham or Stanford Hill are short bus ride away.

OP wants to have a social life with some disposable cash and wants to see her DH. Living one hour away from work in S London and spending most of their income to rent in Kensington won’t be a good option.

Stamford Hill not Stanford!

It’s worth factoring in the brand new Elizabeth Line when it comes to commuting to the City. I used it for the first time the other day and it’s a bit of a getting-across-London game changer!

Some people are being downright unhelpful on this thread.

In most parts of the UK, a high salary means being able to buy a house in the city centre and go on holiday each year. London is a different kettle of fish - I'm not saying you can't live well on £120k, but you have to adjust your expectations for what "well" means. If you haven't lived in the UK before, it might well come as a shock to learn that with such a high salary, you're only looking at renting a small flat outside the city centre, or a small house far, far away that requires an expensive rail fare to connect you to the city centre.

I adore London, but it's a slightly ridiculous city, and people who haven't lived here are right to question whether the lifestyle it offers is a lifestyle they want. If you're coming from, for example, the US, where it's normal to have giant rooms, the quality of housing here might feel like a massive downgrade. (I think the average flat size here is about half the average in some US states.)

FWIW, I like Walthamstow (I've never felt unsafe there) and it's an easy, easy commute for the OP's partner. It would be a good place to start looking for somewhere.

Yes! There's no point moving to London for a couple years and living in zone 4/6/suburbs.

OP we are expats in London on less than half that salary, and have a perfectly nice life. You'll be fine!

Hi OP. We used to live in zone 1 when DH was a single earner on 120k and I was a sahm to a baby. That's about 6k after tax and we had a very comfortable lifestyle but not extravagant. Our biggest expense was on rent. We didn't have a car as the tube went everywhere and rented one when we travelled out of London. I think you wouldn't be able to save much nor afford private school on that income, but there's definitely enough spare money around for eating out, holidays, shopping, etc.

HundredMilesAnHour - I used to live just near Broadway Market in E2 in the late 90s. When we happened to drive through that area fairly recently, I couldn't believe the change. It's actually unrecognisable to what it once was. The flat we sold for £100K would now go for £700K. And yes, there are plenty of young families who have moved in and of course, Victoria Park is still there. But you don't have to scratch much beneath the veneer of the trendy cafes and million £ warehouse conversion flats to find that the deprivation that existed when I lived there, is still there. You don't have to wander far off the hipster / 'young professional' streets. The people who lived there before it became cool can't afford to spend ££ on the latest food fad to descend on their high street. There used to just be a pub, a newsagents and a laundrette. That was it. Now It's all £7 super-smoothies and matcha lattes.

So there is definitely more of a buzz round there than SW London, yes I agree. But there is also more deprivation and associated issues of a more divided demographic.