Rented normally, it costs you £3,125 a month. That is £37,502 a year, every year you hold it.

Will it pay?Calculator

The mortgage alone costs more than the whole rent — you top up £3,125 a month

It is £3,125 a month short. Borrowing £576,946 less would close that shortfall — which is £576,946 more cash at the start, on top of the deposit.

£6,094 mortgage

£5,179 rent in£3,125 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

£571,475 + refurb costs

And about £187,508 more over five years, because it loses £3,125 every month you hold it — before any repair. That already assumes the rent never falls.

£571,475 to buy it

deposit · stamp duty · solicitor · fees~£30,268, unseen

□ works not inspected

What would have to be true?The search

No offer makes this pay

Even at £900,000 — well below the £1,500,000 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 £900,000

Is the price right?The deeds

Last sold for £1,305,000 in 2015

Nothing nearby is comparable, but asking is 15% more than the £1,305,000 paid for it in 2015.

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

What will the rent borrow?Lender test

The rent carries £549,496 of the £1,125,000 loan

That £575,504 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 £487,585. Lenders test the rent at 7.5% and need it to cover 145% of the payment.

£10,195 needed

more than the £4,980 rent

stressed at 7.5%, 145% cover

◧ rent after empty weeks £4,980PRA-style test

How big is it, really?The working

One figure, and nothing checking it 1,400 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

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 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 · 5 we could not check

■ from council licensing registerlisting last seen 15 Sep 2026

Which strategy wins?The ways to run it

Every way loses money — Standard rental loses least, at £3,125 a month

Let it to the council: £10,008 a year less, but they keep paying when it is empty.

Standard rental−£3,125 · £601,743 in

Guaranteed council rent−£3,959 · £601,743 in

Rent by the room−£4,675 · £601,743 in

Housing-benefit rent−£5,014 · £601,743 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?The five-year sums

−£293,966 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 24% in the price would leave nothing from a sale after selling costs, and you would still owe the lender any shortfall. That is the £601,743 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