house buying - should a young person buy a one bedroom flat

[SusanSocks]

or a two bed room flat or even a house

which is the best way to get on the ladder?

Depends on what they need and how much money they have.

to get on the ladder, what is the best to resale?

Why does it matter?

They buy what they want afford.

No point saying but a 3 bed detached, when they've got money for a bedsit...

i didnt say 3 bed

hopefully some other more helpful person will come along and advise

There is a resale market for everything if valued correctly.
List what you need.
Rooms size outdoor space etc.
Location.
Look at what you can afford and then buy accordingly.

Houses are always better at resale than flats. Always go for freehold. Flats have extra charges which can put buyers off and some have been tricky to sell since the cladding scandal.

Id avoid anything leasehold. Apart from that anything goes.

Location is probably more important. However the benefit of a two bed is that the young person could have a lodger to help pay bills.

But a one bed in a great location would win over a two bed in a dodgy neighbourhood, in my opinion.

The market for one beds is much smaller than for two beds. But it depends where too. Lots of retirement type properties are one beds. If you work from home, it's better to have a different room from your bedroom or living room to have separation. If you have anyone to stay in a one bed you either give them the bedroom or they sleep in the lounge. You generally get more space in a two bed as there's an extra room.

It depends on the location, the price, how much money you have, etc. There isn't an answer to your question that fits all situations.

The biggest house or flat you can purchase comfortably is my answer!

This really depends on the location.
In my area flats do not sell well but it means you can get them a lot cheaper. A 2 bedroom flat is always more desirable then a 1 bedroom flat as it has a wider range of people who would require it. Also allows for visitors etc.

If the choice is same area and similar costs then a house will be better but obviously they are solely responsible for the upkeep costs compared to splitting a shard for communal aspects like roof etc

My son bought a flat in 2014, it’s nice modern, has lifts etc but he hasn’t made a penny on it, they are advertised for sale at the price he paid, go for a small house.

Be very wary of leasehold flats. The service charge on mine has doubled in the six years I’ve lived here and the management company can more or less charge what they like and it has to be paid.

Unfortunately I needed two bedrooms and it was all I could afford after my divorce but with hindsight I really wish I’d bought a one bed house and worked around DS when he stayed over a few times a week. He left home a couple of years after I bought my flat and typically I now can’t afford to buy a house!

I was being helpful. It doesn't matter.... It will depend on where you are, what you're buying, interest rates local demand...

It really makes little difference, so buy what you need or want now.

As PP have said - it depends on the location, especially if you're buying a flat. They can be tricky to sell on if the location isn't known for flats, as there's unlikely to be much demand.

However, if you are in an area where flats are a common housing choice, then it should be fine. If you're somewhere like London or another big city, it may be the only realistic option for a FTB (unless they have ££££££). However, you need to look carefully at the service charge and ground rent arrangements, as well as the cladding situation.

One word of warning. Be prepared for circumstances to change. It's easy to view property buying as a 'ladder' but that's not always a linear journey. The rising market you're looking for to add value to your existing property, will also be adding to the cost of your next purchase.

Depends entirely on budget, surely?

Obviously if you can buy a family home (in an area that you want to live in now and stay long-term...) this makes sense; no paying stamp, EA fees etc on multiple purchases to move up the ladder. Even better if you can out extra rooms & clear mortgage quicker.

However, like most young people, we were scraping together a deposit & could only afford a 1 bedroom flat at first (unless we moved an hour away & then we'd have been spending £9k/annum on extra commuting costs between us). So we bought one, and upsized once we could afford to.

It all depends.

In London it would be unusual to be able to buy a house as a first home unless very far out, which is not what most young people want. Millions live in flats.

You can get lovely conversion flats where you have a share of freehold, the ground or first floor of a Victorian terrace.

If a flat is what is affordable go for long lease, avoid anywhere with lifts, concierges, high service charges etc. Hence conversions..

Definitely need more context. City, town or village. Presumably this is for them to live in?

I mean the younger the better I say.

I would buy the biggest property in the best area they can afford, simply because it's an expensive process to buy and sell - so ideally it would be somewhere which could grow to fit future needs without re-selling.

A second bedroom could allow a friend or lodger to move in and help with the mortgage - or if you have a partner, maybe it would allow you to stay there and have a kid there in future years. It's all about longevity.

We went the extra mile to buy a three bed place and we're still here 25 years later and have brought our family up here. That wasn't anticipated when we moved in.

We bought a 2 bed flat in 2012 in London and barely made any money on it. But it was worth it for us because it gave us the city centre lifestyle we needed, and it was large so we were able to raise 2 dcs there. It was leasehold and there was a monthly service charge, but it went up a small amount every year, not doubling rapidly like some modern leaseholds. Realistically there are very few freehold properties in inner London at FTB prices and it's the norm to buy a flat rather than a house there, you just have to be careful when checking the terms.

We own a 4 bed freehold house in London now and we were able to buy a bigger property not because of equity in our previous property, but through building up investments in shares which have increased value far more than house prices. So it's possible to make investments outside of property to help you move up the ladder.

I would never buy a flat - issues with leasehold, service charges to pay which increase every year, more chance of noise from neighbours, probably no garden to use, harder to sell than a house, don’t keep or increase their value as much as houses. Even in London, many sellers are struggling to sell flats, even in amazing locations.

Better to stretch to a small house than buy a flat or keep on saving for the deposit for a house. Always buy a freehold house. They’re rare, but one bedroom houses do come on the market from time to time.

Personally I’d advise a house if possible.

Flats (at least around me) are harder to sell, and often subject to high leasehold fees which can make it even harder to sell if they increase.

And now that property is more expensive, people are buying their first property older, and stamp duty can be very expensive, the ladder seems to be much less of a ladder.

Depends entirely on budget and ongoing affordability.