Rented normally, it costs you £762 a month. That is £9,144 a year, every year you hold it.

Will it pay?Calculator

The mortgage alone costs more than the whole rent — you top up £762 a month

It is £762 a month short. Borrowing £140,680 less would close that shortfall — which is £140,680 more cash at the start, on top of the deposit.

+£950−£1,320−£392−£762

Rent inMortgageRunning costsShort by

The rent covers £950 of that — you cover £762

◧ market rent £950 · 118 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

£111,775 + refurb costs

And about £45,721 more over five years, because it loses £762 every month you hold it — before any repair. That already assumes the rent never falls.

£111,775 to buy it

deposit · stamp duty · solicitor · fees~£20,226, unseen

□ works not inspected

What would have to be true?The search

No offer makes this pay

Even at £195,000 — well below the £325,000 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 £195,000

What will the rent borrow?Lender test

The rent carries £100,796 of the £243,750 loan

That £142,954 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 £126,827. Lenders test the rent at 7.5% and need it to cover 145% of the payment.

£2,209 needed

more than the £913 rent

stressed at 7.5%, 145% cover

◧ rent after empty weeks £913PRA-style test

How big is it, really?The plan

One figure, and nothing checking it 1,299 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 · 1 came back clear · 5 we could not check · 1 does not apply to this property

■ from council licensing registerlisting last seen 11 Sep 2026

Which strategy wins?The ways to run it

Every way loses money — Standard rental loses least, at £762 a month

Let it to the council: £2,268 a year less, but they keep paying when it is empty.

Standard rental−£762 · £132,001 in

Guaranteed council rent−£951 · £132,001 in

Rent by the room−£970 · £158,001 in

Housing-benefit rent−£1,123 · £132,001 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

−£61,271 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 26% in the price would leave nothing from a sale after selling costs, and you would still owe the lender any shortfall. That is the £132,001 you put in. The 5-year fix runs past this 5-year hold, so the rate reset comes after it.

−£132,001+£373,342−£9,334−£243,750−£49,528−£61,271

Cash you put inSale valueSelling costsMortgageRent lossesYou are down

◧ 2.0%/yr growth assumed