Rented normally, it costs you £576 a month. That is £6,911 a year, every year you hold it.

Will it pay?Calculator

The mortgage alone costs more than the whole rent — you top up £576 a month

It is £576 a month short. Borrowing £106,329 less would close that shortfall — which is £106,329 more cash at the start, on top of the deposit.

+£1,247−£1,361−£462−£576

Rent inMortgageRunning costsShort by

The rent covers £1,247 of that — you cover £576

◧ market rent £1,247 · 5 comps2 empty weeks a year assumed

What if I change my assumptions?The dials

At the asking price, 25% deposit, 6.50% charged

Try your own numbersLive

You keep-£576/mo

All-in cash£128,586

PaybackNever

Offer−+

Deposit−+

Mortgage rate−+

Rent−+

Worked at 6.50% — 5.75% quoted plus a company premium.

◧ worked out from local rents

What will it cost me to buy?Breakdown

£115,425 + refurb costs

And about £34,557 more over five years, because it loses £576 every month you hold it — before any repair. That already assumes the rent never falls.

£115,425 to buy it

deposit · stamp duty · solicitor · fees~£13,161, unseen

□ works not inspected

What would have to be true?The search

No offer makes this pay

Even at £201,000 — well below the £335,000 asked — the rent still does not cover the costs. The gap is the rent against the running costs, not the price, so negotiating does not close it.

◧ worked back from the rent■ stamp duty re-bandedtested down to £201,000

What will the rent borrow?Lender test

The rent carries £132,308 of the £251,250 loan

That £118,942 is yours to find on top of the deposit. Tested at 125% instead of 145% — a company or a basic-rate taxpayer usually is — the gap is £97,773. Lenders test the rent at 7.5% and need it to cover 145% of the payment.

£2,277 needed

more than the £1,199 rent

stressed at 7.5%, 145% cover

◧ rent after empty weeks £1,199PRA-style test

How big is it, really?The plan

One figure, and nothing checking it 893 sq ft

Only the agent’s figure exists for this house. Open for what that means.

□ area unchecked — agent’s own

Is it a good location?Open the map

No school rated Good or better in this postcode area

5 schools in this postcode area, none rated Good or better and flood risk checking… — open for the map, the schools and the rest.

Article 4Not assessed for this address

■ postcode area, not this address

What could kill thisThe checks

You would need a licence from the council first

Letting without the council’s licence is an offence, and the fee is in no figure here.

2 problems found · 2 came back clear · 4 we could not check · 1 does not apply to this property

■ from council licensing registerlisting last seen 14 Sep 2026

Which strategy wins?The ways to run it

Every way loses money — Rent by the room loses least, at £470 a month

Let it to the council: £2,304 a year less, but they keep paying when it is empty.

Rent by the room−£470 · £154,586 in

Standard rental−£576 · £128,586 in

Guaranteed council rent−£768 · £128,586 in

Housing-benefit rent−£1,005 · £128,586 in

Each row: money kept a month, then the cash it ties up. Not compared: Do it up, then remortgage (pays back at the remortgage) · Short-stay let (no local short-let data) · Buy, improve & sell (pays out on sale)

◧ 4 ways, one measureranked on money kept each month, at the asking price

What would you walk away with, after 5 years?The five-year sums

−£47,441 after five years on the cash you put in, before tax on the sale

Less than the same cash would have made in a savings account, after tax on the interest. The savings account’s capital is not at risk; the property’s is. A fall of about 25% in the price would leave nothing from a sale after selling costs, and you would still owe the lender any shortfall. That is the £128,586 you put in. The 5-year fix runs past this 5-year hold, so the rate reset comes after it.

−£128,586+£379,312−£9,483−£251,250−£37,434−£47,441

Cash you put inSale valueSelling costsMortgageRent lossesYou are down

◧ 2.0%/yr growth assumed