If you had a buy-to-let, would you sell it to get a bigger main house?

[Falcon1]

I'll probably get flamed for having two properties, but anyway, would appreciate some views on the following:

My DH and I own a small family home in the South East, plus a flat in London (I bought it to live in 10 years ago when my parents died) which we rent out. Now we have two DDs, we're really keen to move to a bigger family home. Our jobs mean we want to stay within commuting distance of London so up-sizing is very expensive! We could afford a slightly bigger house in a nicer area if we don't sell the flat. Or a forever family home if we do. It sounds like a no-brainer, but I'm so worried about my children's future hopes of getting on the property ladder, paying for uni etc, plus the rubbish pension my DH and I will get. The flat has always seemed like a security against those concerns. So, my question is, is it worth selling the buy-to-let to get a lovely home? Or would that be financially stupid?

Keep it. It will help your children's future and you will never be able to save the same amount over a 20 year period. Forget about the rental income it is how much it will increase by.
When your girls leave home you won't need a big property anyway. Even if you only earn a couple of grand rent a year it is still worth it.

I think you need to see an IFA/tax advisor, as there are all sorts of implications about selling - CGT at up to 40% being one of them. You really need a full overview of your options - I'm sure they'd have some good ideas e.g. equity release from BTL to allow you to trade up on your home, remortgaging etc.

I agree with the advice to see a decent financial advisor. There are different implications to each decision

(Eg no CGT on main family home).

Another option could be a mortgage with a longer term (meaning you can borrow more) given that you should have the rental income from the flat even post retirement.

I would sell it. When your children are ready to leave home you can always downsize and free up some cash to help them.

I'd keep it.

I'd sell personally but I'm all about living in the moment.

Your kids can sort themselves out when the time comes. It's better for them to learn to budget rather than having everything handed to them.

I suppose you would be transferring one property asset to another and as they are both in SE, it probably doesn't make a huge difference in value appreciation over the next decade or so but you would lose the additional income. It might only be 8k now but I am sure that figure will rise over the next decade.

Busyboysmum - I'm afraid learning to budget won't get you on the property ladder in the south east!

OP - I sold my Zone 2 London flat in 2000 for just under £90k. It had doubled in value in about 5 years and would fetch £300k minimum now. My kids are 18-24 and I so wish I'd hung onto that flat! We sold it to fund an extension to our home but there's no way the value of our extended home has kept up with the increasing value of the flat.

If I'd kept it I'd be looking to sell it in the next few years so I could give my dcs a deposit for their own homes.

I'be kept my old flat from my single days, becoming an accidental LL.

I had my DC at 35+ & the thought of funding them through University (if they go) in my mid-60's is terrifying, so my flat will help with that (they can either live there rent-free or use income to fund rent elsewhere).

It will also be my pension pot, in addition to my NHS pension. I truly do not believe there will be a state pension for all in 20 years time.