Rented normally, it costs you £1,263 a month. That is £15,162 a year, every year you hold it.

Will it pay?Calculator

The mortgage alone costs more than the whole rent — you top up £1,263 a month

It is £1,263 a month short. Borrowing £233,260 less would close that shortfall — which is £233,260 more cash at the start, on top of the deposit.

£2,234 mortgage

£1,661 rent in£1,263 short

£25 of that is a guess — no service charge published.

□ service charge not published2 empty weeks a year assumed

What if I change my assumptions?The dials

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

Change any of these 16 and every card on this page changes with it. The 6.50% is the 5.75% quoted plus a company premium.

◧ worked out from local rents

What will it cost me to buy?Breakdown

£195,125 + refurb costs

And about £75,810 more over five years, because it loses £1,263 every month you hold it — before any repair. That already assumes the rent never falls.

£195,125 to buy it

deposit · stamp duty · solicitor · fees~£1,875, unseen

□ works not inspected

What would have to be true?The search

No offer makes this pay

Even at £330,000 — well below the £550,000 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 £330,000

Is the price right?The deeds

Last sold for £199,999 in 2007

Nothing nearby is comparable, but asking is 175% more than the £199,999 paid for it in 2007.

□ this address’s own deeds, no comparable saleHM Land Registry Price Paid Data

What will the rent borrow?Lender test

The rent carries £176,233 of the £412,500 loan

That £236,267 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 £208,069. Lenders test the rent at 7.5% and need it to cover 145% of the payment.

£3,738 needed

more than the £1,597 rent

stressed at 7.5%, 145% cover

◧ rent after empty weeks £1,597PRA-style test

How big is it, really?The plan

The rooms are on the plan; the total is not

The plan is on file; the floor area is not.

□ no floor area published

Is it a good location?Open the map

No school rated Good or better in this postcode area

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

Article 4Planning permission required to let by the room

■ 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 · 3 came back clear · 2 we could not check · 2 do not apply to this property

■ from council licensing registerlisting last seen 16 Sep 2026

Which strategy wins?The ways to run it

Every way loses money — Standard rental loses least, at £1,263 a month

Let it to the council: £1,572 a year less, but they keep paying when it is empty.

Standard rental−£1,263 · £197,000 in

Guaranteed council rent−£1,394 · £197,000 in

Housing-benefit rent−£1,715 · £197,000 in

Each row: money kept a month, then the cash it ties up. Not compared: Rent by the room (only 2 bedrooms) · 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)

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

What would you walk away with?The five-year sums

−£98,247 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 23% in the price would leave nothing from a sale after selling costs, and you would still owe the lender any shortfall. That is the £197,000 you put in. The 5-year fix runs past this 5-year hold, so the rate reset comes after it.

◧ 2.0%/yr growth assumed