Level of family income required for private school fees?

[TheABC]

Had an interesting discussion with DH over tea tonight, after reading in the independent supplement that the average cost of fees per term for a day boarder is 4k. We are approaching that in nursery fees for DS and it's a struggle. I can't imagine trying to juggle that sort of cost for two children over 7 or more years. However, clearly a lot of people are, as 6% of all UK pupils are privately educated and I doubt we have that many millionaires.

DH thinks the income ceiling is around the 80k mark, I think it could easily be lower, depending on family circumstances (e.g mortgage commitments). Who is right?

I suppose that was my point - if you work full time and pay a day nursery fee per child or one person to care for all the children the cost of school fees are not too different so if you can afford to work in effect then you can afford fees surely? Obviously if yo have a parent who looks after your children for nothing then when they turn 5 and go to school you may not be able to afford fees but working parents presumably can UNLESS they had saved up for the 5 years the children under 5 in advance I suppose and pay for the childcare that way.

granola private schools have always excluded the majority of people ie the working classes.

I don't think the fact that they now exclude the traditional middle classes is any more unfair or sad.

I don't believe the trad middle classes are any more deserving of a good education.

Thing is jilly you still need childcare because of the loooooong holidays.

My DC have always had around 20 weeks a year.

This is such an interesting thread, I am learning so much.

As we live a totally different way and many figures I hear on here might as well be phone numbers or lottery numbers, I would like to ask a question.

OK, what sort of mortgage and other essential bills do people have to pay these days.
For e.g 80k sounds a huge amount to me, but I can't imagine how this is broken down.

I agree TheWordFactory - I don't see us not having childcare on top of school fees anytime soon given the holidays

I think that is a very pertinent question morethan

For couples with young children, who have bought a home relatively recently, their mortgage will be huge, especially in the SE.

Add this to the cost of child care and the sort of pension contribution considered necessary to have a remotely comfortable retirement, and you average professional has nowhere near enough left for private schools fees.

Surely it depends on where you live? Ds's fees are 25% of my income but the cost of living here isn't as bad as it is down south (I'm in the East Midlands) so we have an OK standard of living after his fees have been paid.

TheWord

If pertinent means rude, then I'm sorry.
You have sort of answered my question.

LadySybil Thank you, that's the sort of thing I meant, a percentage can explain quite a bit.

I wasn't expecting people to talk their personal figures.
So, just like everything else we hear about the cost of living, the problem to access could also be due to living in the south.

I am constantly telling dd how lucky she is and what a fantastic opportunity she has been given and how many parents couldn't afford it. I have told her how much it will cost but its just numbers to her.

No! Pertinent means relevant ie a Good Question .

You're thinking of impertinent which means cheeky!

And I don't see why on an anonymous forum people shouldn't give figures.

I wouldn't discuss the finances and how many other parents couldn't afford it with her to be honest, it's one heck of a burdon to place on a child's shoulders. Ds knows his school isn't free, he's 15 and knows what it costs but I kept this from him when he was smaller though.

The elephant in the room here is the massive rise in property prices in the last 15-20 years - more than 3x in real terms. For well-paid professionals who bought into the property market before 2000/2001, sure, it's probably not hard to "make sacrifices" enough to afford private schooling (or to pay it effectively from property inflation via remortgaging or property investments). Now, even very well- paid young professionals under the age of 35-40 are struggling just to afford housing. I know couples of two city solicitors who are scrimping to afford an ordinary house in London - deeply ordinary 2 or 3-bed flats or terraced houses in outer zones of London costing 600-800k, which a generation ago were owned by manual workers on one ordinary salary, not two Oxbridge-educated professionals each on salaries of 150k+.

The same throughout the SE and lots of the rest of the UK - massive housing costs prevent nearly everyone from being able to pay school fees out of income. I agree that the schools have marketed themselves at the super-rich and asset-rich - but this is also an effect of the massive wealth transfer of property market inflation in the last two decades. The old and the super-rich have hoovered up the UK asset market - which is obviously a problem if your "business" relies on educating the young. I would expect that many children's school fees in the private sector are paid by grandparents releasing property equity (in effect transferring "inheritances" early) - that's certainly the case amongst most of my generation (under-forties).

I think it's an exaggeration to say that all of the SE is affected. In many areas you can buy a perfectly OK family house for 400k, a very nice one for 600k, and the schools aren't targeting themselves at the super-rich.

Cauchy, this is exactly my point - run 400 or 600k through a mortgage calculator and see what kind of combined income after tax you need to afford that - THEN see if you can pay, say, 2 x 15k school fees a year on top. No, you can't easily do it even with decent professional salaries, no matter how many trips to Pizza Express you give up.

TWF The old independent schools have always had scholarships and bursaries for the "working classes". It's the middle that's being squeezed now as so many schools, which could decide differently, are now targetting a sliver of the super rich.

Those are the facts behind the anguish which is becoming so prevalent on this forum.

It's not sad but it is unfair to the one group affected: the clingers on. It's also bad news for the schools themselves whose character is changing more rapidly than parents and prospective parents realise.

Doesn't that assume the same distribution of bright students in a largely non-selective state system as you'd find in a largely selective private system? That's a poor assumption. You need to look at the A grade A level cohort and compare like for like. There may still be some imbalance, but nothing like what you portray. Facts first please. Debate to follow.

Not all bright students come from families with enough money to send them private (or some families just don't want to go private) and hence lots of very bright children are in state schools. Likewise, not all privately educated children are brighter than average. I can think of one private school local to me which is not academically selective and has a very mixed ability student spread and another private school which specialises in teaching children with specific learning difficulties. Neither of these schools achieve results above the local comprehensive schools. These schools are not unique, around the country similar schools make up part of the 6% of privately educated children.
Sure, some private schools are very academically selective, but so are the state grammar schools. I still think we should have far more of the 50% Oxbridge students coming from state schools. The current figures are nowhere near representative of the academic spread across state vs private schools.

We couldn't afford private school. However we have a family fund that covers school and university fees for children in the family. (investment by great great grandparents that covered my dads, and his siblings schooling and then mine and my siblings and now my dc and if my siblings have any dc)

DS1 has left school now, ds2 luckily enough passed the 11+ and pays minimal costs each year at a grammar school. DD is in yr 4 at a fee paying school, her uniform costs can be covered by the fund and so can trips, but we pay them if they are within our reach.

We live in a modest 3 bed semi, with one car, we do have a couple of holidays a year, but even cutting back on those would still not afford us private education for our dc.

I went to a private school, H went to the local comp and was very much against private schooling until we had dc! If we didn't have the fund I don't think that I would be too upset as the area we live in has some fantastic state schools and so I would expect them to be pushed to do their best at those state schools as well.

My mortgage was £90k a year interest free at once point relatively recently certainly within the last 6 years plus the school fees. So don't assume everyone has no mortgage and thus can afford school fees.

You can buy the first house we were living in in outer London for £350k today like this one www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/detailMatching.html/svr/1124;jsessionid=C0DDCCBEC9BBC30501690BE451F62971?prop=31283617&sale=46636496&country=england except as it's now a days it's much more done up and smarter and back 30 years ago you needed 2 full time professional salaries to fund it and today you do too. We paid 12% interest rate and today you might pay 2 - 3%. I am not saying things are dead easy today - I have 3 older children who have all graduated and I know what things are like out there and nor should anyone unable to pay school fees which puts them in the position 92% of the UK always has been in expect anyone to weep tears for them.

I don't think people should worry. Decide what is important to you, work as hard as you choose (ideally women seeking to out earn their man of course and work full time as that's fun) and then choose an education you feel is right for the child. Plenty of people achieve that in the state system.

TheWord seems like I need the English lesson.

ladySybil

I hadn't thought of it like that, I just wouldn't want her to take it for granted.
It's a different set up with dd as she has an award from gov scheme for music and drama and whilst we do have to pay a small amount, the fees are over 30k per year.
I guess it's a fine line not allowing them to take it for granted and putting pressure on them.
After reading your comment I will lay off now and not tell her anymore.

For my family we will need 80k after taxes to pay private school for two children; that includes the mortgage and all the family extras but does not leave much for holidays. That is paying purely on monthly income as we don't have investments or rental properties. A big risk in my opinion as by the time kids finish their education we will have about 10 years before we retire to save for a pension; that is without thinking of university.

90k mortgage, bloody hell Jilly

Your house must be worth squillions.

Cauchy, this is exactly my point - run 400 or 600k through a mortgage calculator and see what kind of combined income after tax you need to afford that - THEN see if you can pay, say, 2 x 15k school fees a year on top.

A 400k mortgage is currently around 2k per month.

A family income of 150k (shared) is about 8k per month. So if you want to then 30k per year = 2.5k per month is possible. That leaves 3.5k per month left to pay bills and live.

In reality most people on 150k (between them) with school aged children will be in their late 30s at least, they will have some equity in their house, and they will have had to put aside income to pay daycare anyhow. If one parent has been staying at home to look after the children then going back to work would increase the family income.

At my DC's school most people are funding it on incomes of this kind of level, living in houses worth 400k-800k. Yes, there are richer families, but most aren't earning incomes which are hundreds of thousands.

Ds knows that other children in the world are not able to go to school at all so he's lucky to live in the UK. It takes a bit of pressure off him but he still knows that he shouldn't take his education for granted. They learned about the young girl who was shot in the head for making a stand for education so he does feel lucky but in a different way, if you see where I'm coming from.

Cauchy, a 400k mortgage is not 2k a month if you are first time buyers or don't have substantial equity anyway. You are missing the point that young professionals are typically paying much higher interest rates. You are also forgetting that if this is joint income then the income multiples lent will be far less.

We're talking here, too, not just about households with 150k+ incomes (there are very few under-40 professionals earning that outside London); but the "traditional middle class", who would have in earlier generations made sacrifices to afford private education - doctors, architects, lecturers, ordinary (not city) solicitors and accountants, and mostly on one rather than two incomes. Starter 2-bed homes where I live in the SE are around 350-400k, and I can assure you two-income professional couples (joint income 80-100k) are struggling to afford these. The majority of the housing market here is buying and selling between those who already benefited from the big price rises between 2000-2007 by already being in the market.

I think you are dramatically overestimating what even well-paid professionals actually earn, and what the cost of housing actually is if you are younger than 40. Have a look at the IFS "Where do I fit in" site - it is very instructive on what income distribution actually looks like in the UK, especially at the top end:

www.ifs.org.uk/wheredoyoufitin/

Both my DH and I are full time GPs with total combined income of about £80K. There is no way we can afford fees of £15k per year per child. Like foodporn, we use good, local state schools and top up with tution if needed.
Most people I know who privately educate their DC use grandparent income to do so, mainly I believe ,because most of our generation have larger mortgages to contend with than previous generations.