Rented normally, it costs you £1,187 a month. That is £14,249 a year, every year you hold it.

Will it pay?Calculator

The mortgage alone costs more than the whole rent — you top up £1,187 a month

It is £1,187 a month short. Borrowing £219,221 less would close that shortfall — which is £219,221 more cash at the start, on top of the deposit.

+£2,523−£3,006−£704−£1,187

Rent inMortgageRunning costsShort by

The rent covers £2,523 of that — you cover £1,187

◧ market rent £2,523 · 19 comps2 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

£264,000 + refurb costs

And about £71,247 more over five years, because it loses £1,187 every month you hold it — before any repair. That already assumes the rent never falls.

£264,000 to buy it

deposit · stamp duty · solicitor · fees~£27,756, unseen

□ works not inspected

What would have to be true?The working

£290,000 off and it stops losing money

At the asking price you feed it £1,187 a month. At £447,686 the rent covers everything — leaving stamp duty of £34,769 at that price.

offer £447,686

asked £740,000

◧ worked back from the rent■ stamp duty re-bandedrounded down to £5,000 — the rent it works back from is an estimate

What will the rent borrow?Lender test

The rent carries £267,692 of the £555,000 loan

That £287,308 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 £244,477. Lenders test the rent at 7.5% and need it to cover 145% of the payment.

£5,030 needed

more than the £2,426 rent

stressed at 7.5%, 145% cover

◧ rent after empty weeks £2,426PRA-style test

How big is it, really?The plan

One figure, and nothing checking it 1,270 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

London, N17 6AS

3 of 5 schools in this postcode area rated Good or Outstanding 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 19 Sep 2026

Which strategy wins?The ways to run it

Every way loses money — Standard rental loses least, at £1,187 a month

Let it to the council: £5,088 a year less, but they keep paying when it is empty.

Standard rental−£1,187 · £291,756 in

Guaranteed council rent−£1,611 · £291,756 in

Rent by the room−£1,645 · £317,756 in

Housing-benefit rent−£1,965 · £291,756 in

Short-stay let−£2,718 · £291,756 in

80 nearby short-lets within 5.5 km · low confidence

Each row: money kept a month, then the cash it ties up. Not compared: Do it up, then remortgage (pays back at the remortgage) · Buy, improve & sell (pays out on sale)

◧ 5 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

−£107,920 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 £291,756 you put in. The 5-year fix runs past this 5-year hold, so the rate reset comes after it.

−£291,756+£836,939−£20,923−£555,000−£77,179−£107,920

Cash you put inSale valueSelling costsMortgageRent lossesYou are down

◧ 2.0%/yr growth assumed