Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The UK’s default “property over everything” investment culture feels unhealthy

35 replies

ByMildEditor · 15/05/2026 22:17

It sometimes feels like property is treated as the default way to build wealth, rather than one option among many - ahead of things like investing in businesses, the stock market or other ventures that don’t rely on extracting income from people’s housing costs. I understand the arguments about stability, tangibility and why people choose it. I also understand the “what happens to renters if landlords sell up” point. But I still find it troubling how normalised it is for housing - an essential, to be used as a primary income-generating asset, especially when the consequences for renters are so significant.

AIBU to feel that the UK’s bricks-and-mortar obsession has downsides we don’t talk about honestly enough?

OP posts:
binliner · 16/05/2026 10:30

Ageing population though with not enough workers to support them

Raven08 · 16/05/2026 10:40

As a country we have always been very conservative (small c) about investing.
We just don't have the American attitude to investing, which is why RR's reduction in cash ISA limits has caused such fury.
People in the UK won't suddenly rush to invest in fintech or start ups, they will just bung it in high interest savings accounts instead.

LoremIpsumCici · 19/05/2026 16:27

InWithPeaceOutWithStress · 16/05/2026 08:53

Love this idea. Is anyone suggesting this or have you just come up with it?

Spain gave me the idea.

LoremIpsumCici · 19/05/2026 16:33

AyeDeadOn · 16/05/2026 08:57

But are you factoring in that the tenant who would be renting there is now going to eithercbe homeless or else also bidding to buy? So either you have an increase in homeless people or you have the same number of people competing to buy?

You mean the tenants that could afford to buy if landlords having bidding wars over properties weren’t driving up housing prices?

Papyrophile · 19/05/2026 16:38

DC has just bought a small house to live in from a landlord who's leaving the game. Average price for the area: not cheap but better than paying £1000 per month for a shared rented house.

For someone to get 10% interest on their cash savings, someone else has to pay a mortgage rate of 12 -14%.

MeetMeOnTheCorner · 19/05/2026 16:43

No rental property - ludicrously high rents as demand isn’t met. Choose what you prefer. No rental property isn’t a great investment everywhere and we’ve made more from other investments. Plus we get tax savings on pension contributions, you don’t on mortgage contributions.

Rookie93 · 19/05/2026 19:32

One element I often think posters miss when discussing the reliance on property to generate a passive income is the series of pension miss selling scandals during late 80's & 90's plus the horrendous issue of the Mirror pensions fund and British Steel pensions among others. Many people have had trust in financial advice and institutions eroded and been badly treated. Where were ordinary people meant to go to ensure security for their future and their families future. Property seemed and still does seem an easily understandable asset.

Papyrophile · 20/05/2026 09:45

@Rookie93 That period was notorious for lack of protections against mis-selling and fraudulent investment schemes. My DH had family members were taken to the cleaners for thousands by McDonald-Wheeler and Barlow Clowes, which some older people may recall. No compensation.

Equitable Life was another scheme often recommended to professional people that went bang, taking the pensions and life insurance savings of hundreds of thousands of people. You've mentioned the Mirror Group and British Steel, and don't forget BHS. I'm sure there were others. Even now, DH absolutely refuses point blank to have anything to do with stockbrokers or equity based investments.

HostaCentral · 22/05/2026 14:04

Rookie93 · 19/05/2026 19:32

One element I often think posters miss when discussing the reliance on property to generate a passive income is the series of pension miss selling scandals during late 80's & 90's plus the horrendous issue of the Mirror pensions fund and British Steel pensions among others. Many people have had trust in financial advice and institutions eroded and been badly treated. Where were ordinary people meant to go to ensure security for their future and their families future. Property seemed and still does seem an easily understandable asset.

True. I am at the end of the boomer generation, Early Gen Z. Yes we bought young, but at 98% mortgages at 10% interest. Our first teeny tiny flat, we made no profit, our terrace we went into negative equity. Our first house we did make a small profit, and we had paid down a lot of the mortgage. This house, our endowments didn't pay out as promised, so we had to find tens of thousands extra to pay down the mortgage. The profit we have made has therefore been eaten away by non performing endowments, and of course the improvements you make to your houses over the years. I often think the supposed value added to your house over time is overstated. If we could offset expense and inflation, it would be way less. But...... We never rented, and that had so many benefits, your own home, a roof, and when we lost jobs, we felt so much more secure, which also happened a lot!

We also never had any extra money for pensions or investments until fairly recently. All the value is in the house, because that's all we could afford.

MeetMeOnTheCorner · 22/05/2026 14:40

There are millions of people who have never invested in anything dodgy and have the tax relief afforded to pension investment. Not doing it and being scared is poor advice. None of the failures affected us and everyone should have a mixed portfolio. In some areas property has barely made any money. Most pensions have.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page