Expensive area or cheaper area

[nattering]

We have two young children under 3. We are in a position to buy an average house in a posh area or a nice house in a cheaper area.

The expensive house (central) will take up all of our cash (200k ish) + most of our stocks for a decent deposit. The area is lovely and I really like it. It is near a fantastic primary school and lots of parks. The house itself is OK, we maybe able to improve it down the line but initially it won't be super comfortable. The garden is tiny.

The cheaper house (village) will leave our investments untouched as we will use the cash for our deposit. It is a nicer house, we will be comfortable there and financially secure. The area is unexciting but does have nice nature and an RSPB park.

I am really torn what to do. The sensible choice is to go village and have a diversified portfolio, much larger house and a large garden for the kids. I suspect we will be near more young families too.

But I am more excited about the posh area (maybe my ego) and also wonder if living centrally will be better for the kids when they are a bit older. There will be more things to do.

What would you do? Have you had to make a similar choice?

Is the cheaper house near a good primary school?

The school is small and rated Good by Offstead

I’d go for the nicer area personally

Better school, nicer area , its a no brainer OP.

The reason why we are considering the village is because we may be better parents to our kids if we are not invested that much into our jobs and in general we are calmer and stress free. We can also take more risks at work.

But I am not excited to live in a village. We will have to drive everywhere, the village doesn’t even have a shop or a GP.

i'd keep looking - there must be a choice in between

You've answered your own question OP. Better area everytime. I read on here one time - worst house best street. Thank you to that poster. So so true. Go for the better area!!

You'll regret being so isolated when they're teenagers and you have to drive them everywhere.
So, keep looking. Not for 'poshness' but something better connected.

Location location location.
you can change the house but not the area.

I’d for for the better area. Villages are lovely for many reasons but not even having a shop, so having to go in a car (or bus?) if you run out of milk etc, and having small kids so having to take them with you in the car, would put me off.

the only thing I thought was a real pro in the village option was you said possibly more young families but you’ll meet loads of families through the great school in the nicer area anyway.

I would hate that. Think you should buy in the more central area and get the more average house.

Nicer area every time for me.

Location location location every time in my book. So long as it doesn't cripple you - go for the nicer area. Being able to walk to places you want to be (pubs, market, shops etc) is wonderful.

If the village had decent village services and I liked the village itself then I'd go for the village whilst they're younger and not be as stressed as work. There's always the option to move when they're older.

Because there's no services and you're not excited about village living then I'd probably consider the better area now.

Thank you for the balanced answer!

Posh house if it's in a good school catchment area.

That would be my priority and you can rebuild savings / change bits of house in time.

so having to go in a car (or bus?) if you run out of milk etc
There is a third option: be organised and therefore don't run out of milk! People in the countryside tend to have a 'be prepared' attitude. Also, you have heard of the internet and grocery deliveries?

OP. you need to be more focussed. How are you looking at central town/city and rural/villages? Draw up a list of your needs and wants.

The reason is that we want to be close to nature, it is really important to my partner. The expensive area is near a green belt and has both amenities and nature at its door step. In the village we would have the nature only.

We live someplace like your second choice (right down to the RSPB reserve!) and whilst I would give my right arm to have stuff within walking distance, our village has such a great community, I couldn’t face living anywhere else.

We also took on a much bigger mortgage for a large family house, and whilst we can afford it, I do think far more about money and the need to keep jobs on the go than I ever did before.

There are pros and cons to each - I’d hate to have to go back to a smaller house now the kids are older.

From your thread title, I was going to say to always go for the best area you can afford. You can change things about your house over time but you can't move the lovely house into the area you would like it to be.

From reading through the thread, it is clear your heart is set on what you call the 'posh area'.
Lots of people don't want to live in a village. Some do, and that's perfect for them, but if you don't want to, then don't.

I would keep looking for a house in a village with an excellent school.

but if it has to be one of these two houses, always the better school. It’s important to consider not just primary school though. You need to look at likely secondary schools as well.

Also consider whether you want to privately educate or not; that will make a difference to your finances.

Location, Location, Location

I be wouldn’t move to a village without a shop. They’re useful for that point if milk, eggs, etc that you may run out of .

what do you mean by cheaper area?
high crime?
poor schools?
no high street?

If so, go for the better "posher" area.
If no, then go for the cheaper area... if it's just a boring area but is safe, good schools, access to amenities, save your money.

personally, I wouldn't move to a village. I've lived in a village before and the kids there were bored out of their minds (10+ year olds). I felt so sorry for them.