750 square feet - 5 people

[Nimbus1999]

Currently going through a divorce and toying with the idea of buying a 750 square feet house for 5 of us (1 adult, 4 children aged 7-13). The plan would be 2 kids share biggest bedroom & other 2 a room each and I’ll sleep on sofa/in trundle bed in kids room. Downstairs in just a living room and separate kitchen diner.

pros - I can afford it without stretching myself financially, close to school, good location.

obvious cons - very small!

Has anyone got any experience / has made this work? I would hope it wouldn’t be forever, maybe 2-3 years until I find my feet.

Thanks for reading

I can't imagine living for years without my own bedroom. Especially with four kids! Where would you go when you just need five minutes to yourself?

I think that you probably have your head screwed on - especially not over-stretching yourself.

A secure and loving environment is far more important than a few extra square metres. And, of course, it probably won't be that long before the DC start heading out into the world themselves thus making a larger home redundant.

This is MN where people expect huge houses and kids all have their own rooms. I've had houses,well cottages considerably smaller than this,2 DSs sharing a room,DD single one on her own. Started married life with ex H living in a caravan. Ended up homeless (because of him) slept on a sofa for a year, while waiting to be housed. I wouldn't rent, I don't worry about huge bedrooms either, although I would give yourself the small one,kids share. I having been in bad situations, because of ex H and loans,(mortgage rate 16% in the 80s,I would always go for the smallest debt possible.

That could work for a short time but I'd have two kids in each room and you in the smallest. The eldest will have to suck it up. Storage is going to be a massive issue.
I had a terrace house similar size and my neighbour was a council tenant and said they'd raised three boys and a girl there. Stayed until early 20s! So it's possible.
I own a flat 575sq foot and it would do three people easily.

Are there no other houses that could be considered? I don't think that house will work. It would be better to find one with a separate dining room/living room and have one of those as a bedroom with just a small living area. Or a living room big enough for a partition wall, but this one is too small.
I would personally try to wait and see what else came up, like one that needs updating but with more space. What do your children think about it? I agree 13 year old and infant school child shouldn't shared a room if it can be helped.

We had 4 DC in a cosy 3 bed terrace, eventually we did the loft as a storage room as too low for an official bedroom and the shortest went up there.

Later on we were able to relocate and move but we would have stayed.

@Nimbus1999 does the house have a garden? That would make a big difference for all of you, even if it's small. Our dc spend so much time in the garden in spring and summer, it definitely feels like an extra room.

Bedroom 1 must be at least 9' wide, not 6'2" ??

I would partition that room into 2 6ft x 9ft rooms. A partition wall with just some timber, bit of insulation, plasterboard and a door wouldn't be more than a few hundred pounds.

Eldest DD gets the window end, youngest the one with no window. Having no window and eldest going through younger DD room to hers isn't ideal but at younger DD's age it's a room for sleeping, isn't it?

You then have the smallest room and other DC share the 2nd.

That would get you through a good few years.

I think you and your ex are going about this the wrong way. You both chose to have 4 kids together, so you need to put them first. The tiny house is bad enough, but them then spending half a week in a 2 bed flat with their dad is even worse!

Many couples seem to find a way for one parent to stay in the family home while the kids are young, then assets are properly split a few years later. Is this not something you guys can do? Surely the house you are in at the moment is much better suited to the kids, and a lot cheaper in the short term as no stamp duty, solicitors fees etc for you both. I think you both need to go back to the drawing board and work out something that is good for your kids, not getting so fixed on 50/50 split.

The OP did not include the moving costs after 2 years, also she can’t afford the mortgage rate once it goes up, 2 lots of stamp duty, moving costs are probably going to take her to at least 34k minimum.

The OP is banking on house prices rising, if they go up by 10% the increase on a bigger house will be even more.

I would be pushing to stay in the house she is now in and buying the husband out of his share of equity.

The act of moving has never cost me anything. Neither has it cost friends and family. You don't HAVE to hire movers etc... those are luxury add on options that millions do without.

Financially renting is an utterly terrible idea, she will lose her deposit to rent cost and have zero to show for it and not be entitled to benefit help after the first 6 months unless she has depleted the deposit. Leaving her with nothing at the end of 2 years accept the mercy of a landlord and raising rent costs.

Granted stamp duty and mortgage rates may be valid point for discussion but thats for the OP to weigh up. It will still be better to have a house than rent as a house has value (which may go up or down) rent does not, she is guaranteed to lose all money in rent where as she could easily come out with something (even if its less than now) from owning. It also puts her in far better credit standing.

To many people sell, go into renting for a year or two and never get back on the ladder and end up bouncing from rental to rental unable to save... it really is just the worst choice money wise.

I think it's fine, it's all that you can afford, so it will have to work! Where I live that's a normal size for a 3 bed terrace, though many are now extended downstairs and into the loft.
You being happy, and not jiggling every month to afford all that you need, will be far more important.
I do think that you and your youngest sharing might be the way forward though. Your oldest girl may well move out if she goes to uni etc and you can have your own room then, or maybe put a conservatory on and you sleep in there.
The only part of your plan that I would say is flawed is the expectation that you'll move out in 2 years... (said as someone still living in my 1-bed starter flat 7 years later, now with my partner and baby, it's not always as easy to move as you hope).

Splitting bedrooms you have to be careful with insurance. Bedroom without window, not allowed. Bathroom yes, bedrooms have to have escape routes in case of fire.

It seems like a sensible plan, it's small but doable if you keep the clutter to a minimum then you have decent family space downstairs and everyone will have a bedroom albeit sharing. I would put oldest dd is smallest room you and youngest in the middle room and two middle ones to share largest. Although if the two middle ones are boys they often seem to have less in the way of bulky toys so it might be better to put them in bunk beds in the middle room and you and the little one sharing the biggest bedroom. Also, do not buy a flat, they are more difficult to sell and have so much more in additional costs with the service charge and ground rent it would be more expensive.

The act of moving has never cost me anything. Neither has it cost friends and family. You don't HAVE to hire movers etc... those are luxury add on options that millions do without.
Buying and selling houses costs money. Solicitors fees for buying, searches, solicitors fees for selling are all unavoidable. Many, many transactions also involve stamp duty.

😆
Buying a house incurs a survey, mortgage fees, solicitors fees for selling and buying and stamp duty.

Is the house likely to make money over the coming couple of years you're living in it?
Are there other shaped houses locally, just wondering if you have any local bungalows that could have the loft converted? We did this and made a huge space in our home for very little money, boarding, plaster, radiator, skylight .... then we had a room 10x4.5 metres
That space in the lounge at the front, could you panel that off as a little room for you or your elder child
Good luck, I'm like you, I'd rather be on the housing ladder and not waste rent money

With that mortgage rate you'd be mad to rent.

Agree share with your youngest and let the oldest have her own room. If you can get what you need in their rooms the older ones will practically live in there anyway so that gives more people space downstairs.

Having a garage is a huge plus too, and I assume you've got some outside space? Even a tiny garden makes a big difference.

Definitely doable.

I don’t want a 50/50 split. I’ve always been primary carer. However, he wants 50 equity hence now 50% childcare so I don’t have a choice. It would definitely not be what I would choose and he won’t settle for anything other than 50/50. So here we are. No way either of us can stay in family home / buy each other out.

Yes and all of that is still less than the amount you spend in rent critically without gaining anything.

OP could rent and possibly have to move up to 4 or so times in 2 years if landlords sell up under her from cost of living (becoming increasingly common) each time with the price shooting up at the start of a new contract. This amount is already far higher than mortgage repayments (so even with interest increases shes not paying as much as rent which covers someone ELSE mortgage and insurance).

There is ZERO security in renting, extortionate costs and absoloutly no chance of any money back except the deposit which likely wont cover the next move.

OP has stated she will lose £38,000 in renting... thats 38k GONE with nothing to show for it. OP can stay in the house as long as she wants, only the bank could repossess it and only if she doesn't pay the lower rates than rent.

I'm not sure why your struggling to grasp that. EVERYONE buying houses pays that stuff its not a magic 'ah-ha' moment no one has considered, its still financially better to own than rent.

We are talking about physically moving. As in getting belonging from one place to another... costs nothing more than a dozen car trips which if your moving fairly locally is zero hassle and no cost bar petrol.

You are talking costs of BUYING which is a different thing... OP has to move regardless of renting or not, its likely to cost less moving to a bought house because shes not on the whim of being kicked out buy the owner.

OP will be aware of costs, not sure why people are talking about basics as if shes a child that has no concept of fees that has just thrown out some wild idea with no research or understanding.

Either OP is a FTB in which case no stamp duty or (wild thought) she has been through it before and is actually experienced in this.

@Nimbus1999 have you watched any of these videos? She often talks about how finances and assests are split, and its not always 50/50, even when custody is 50/50.

Where have I said that she should rent, her sums do not add up and is not thinking of the next move and when her mortgage product goes up.

Moving costs are stamp duty etc.

OP has already said she can afford to absorb the increase when her mortgage fix eventually ends, so that's covered.

Thank you, I haven’t no but will definitely have a look.