Value of 1m UK homes ‘has increased by at least half since pandemic'
Many of the homes that have seen their value increase by 50% or more in the past five years are located in northern England and Wales, the website said.
Pandemic and lifestyle-led changes in buyer requirements have prompted interest in previously overlooked areas that offer good value for money, it added.
In addition, rental price hikes in cities have encouraged first-time buyers to purchase in more affordable areas where buying can be a cheaper alternative, Zoopla said.
The website highlighted some hotspots that have emerged in Wales and northern England.
It said South Wales presents a 'compelling picture,' with buyers able to find good value and be within commuting distance to Cardiff.
Areas such as Blaenau Gwent and Merthyr Tydfil have seen three-in-10 homes increase in value by 50% or more over the past five years, Zoopla said.
In a similar pattern, parts of North West England located near Manchester and Liverpool have seen house price jumps.
Homeowners in Rochdale, Oldham and Bolton are among those who may have seen their property's value surge by 50% or more over the past five years, Zoopla said.
The sizeable value increases observed in the North are less common in southern regions, the website added.
A significant proportion of homes in the South that have experienced substantial value growth in recent years tend to be concentrated in desirable coastal destinations and areas of natural beauty, such as the Isle of Wight, it added.
Richard Donnell, executive director at Zoopla, said: 'Our latest analysis clearly shows there is no single housing market and that house price trends vary widely across the UK.
'One million UK homes have seen their value increase by 50% or more over the last five years as higher mortgage rates and rising rents encourage home buyers to seek out value for money in localised markets across northern England and Wales.
'Home value growth has been weaker across southern England and particularly in London. A combination of high prices and higher mortgage rates has reduced buying power, and this has been reflected in flat prices and modest price falls in inner London.
'The UK currently has the most homes for sale in seven years. It's critically important serious sellers fully understand the local market dynamics impacting the value of their home and seek the advice of agents on where to set the asking price for their home in order to achieve a sale.'
Matt Thompson, head of sales at London-based estate agent Chestertons, said: 'In London, buyer demand has remained relatively strong over the past weeks, which is resulting in stable or increasing property values in certain areas. Other parts of the capital, such as prime central London, however, have seen a slight price adjustment, which is giving more domestic buyers the opportunity to purchase a property in sought-after locations within their initial budget.'
Nathan Emerson, chief executive of property professionals' body Propertymark, said: 'For people already on the property ladder, this will increase equity, provide greater refinancing opportunities, and may make it easier for those who wish to move into a bigger, more expensive home to do so.
'However, for first-time buyers, this presents the potential for further restrictions such as increased costs, affordability challenges and greater competition from other buyers, which could drive up prices even further.'
Zoopla's analysis compared current home value estimates published on the website with values in June 2020.
The main figures included the whole of the UK, while sub-national analysis excluded Northern Ireland.
Here are the percentages of homes in each region or nation that have seen average value gains of 50% or more in the past five years, with the average price in June 2025 and the average cash increase among homes with a value change of 50% or more:
London, 1%, £825,100, £371,000
South East, 2%, £687,300, £299,600
East of England, 2%, £518,800, £226,100
South West, 3%, £503,500, £216,300
East Midlands, 4%, £277,300, £114,300
West Midlands, 4%, £278,200, £111,300
Scotland, 6%, £222,900, £93,000
Wales, 11%, £230,800, £90,700
Yorkshire and the Humber, 6%, £215,500, £86,200
North West, 12%, £199,300, £77,100
North East, 5%, £168,700, £69,200
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting
The ousted head of the Financial Ombudsman Service received a pay-off of almost £230,000, it has been disclosed in the annual report. Abby Thomas, who left abruptly on 6 February, was paid £229,869 in severance payments on top of her normal salary. The payoff included £100,000 for loss of office, £107,692 in lieu of notice and £22,177 for a period of gardening leave that began on the day she left, the FOS said. MPs on the Treasury select committee have hit out at the manner of her departure and criticised the FOS chairwoman Baroness Manzoor for refusing to answer questions on why Thomas left and whether she was forced out. The FOS, which rules on complaints by consumers about financial services firms and can set compensation orders, is under pressure to reform. Rachel Reeves has pledged to curb its powers so it no longer acts like a regulator after complaints from the industry that it has increased the cost of 'mass redress events'. It has been dealing with a significant rise in claims, mainly related to car finance loans, but also because of concerns about other consumer loans and more people complaining about banks' handling of frauds. Dame Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the Treasury committee, said this month: 'The handling of this situation by the senior leadership has been deeply disappointing.' Thomas, a former Virgin Media executive, served for less than three years. She has been replaced by James Dipple-Johnstone as chief ombudsman and Jenny Simmonds as interim chief executive. Manzoor is due to retire on August 1. The FOS received 450,000 new inquiries in the year to March, up from 330,000. The motor finance industry is braced for a judgment from the Supreme Court this Friday that could determine the scale of compensation payments for failing to disclose commissions paid to dealers.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
NatWest faces questions over links to collapsed 79th Group
NatWest is facing scrutiny over its relationship with a collapsed £200 million investment group which insolvency practitioners suspect was a Ponzi scheme. 79th Group attracted thousands of investors from the UK and overseas, before collapsing into administration in April, two months after the City of London police announced an investigation into a 'suspected widespread fraud'. The company has denied wrongdoing. Insolvency practitioners estimate 79th Group owes more than £200 million to about 3,700 people. Some investors have life savings at risk. The matter was raised in parliament this month. The 'main account' of the group was held at NatWest, according to administrators from Kroll and Quantuma. It is understood that the relationship originated at the bank's Southport branch, which is near 79th Group's Merseyside head office. The bank also holds an outstanding charge over a 79th Group entity which was first registered 20 years ago. That company went into insolvency in May. Investors' funds were paid into a 'treasury account [and then] transferred out to other entities', administrators said in a recent report to creditors. They are investigating the 'flow of funds'. Investors' money does not appear to have been 'ring-fenced' and was instead 'pooled' in group accounts. No formal loan accounts appear to have been recorded or board minutes yet identified relating to the management of investors' money, insolvency practitioners have claimed. The bank declined to answer a series of questions over its banking relationship with 79th Group, including how much money was received and processed by the bank; whether it had continued to receive investor funds after the arrests; whether it had failed to detect serious irregularities; and whether NatWest was investigating. A NatWest spokeswoman said: 'Combating fraud is a top priority and we are committed to preventing criminal activity. We will not make any further comment on this case.' Contractual agreements between the group and investors stated that funds would be used for specific projects, including a £250 million holiday park in north Wales and a mining venture. City of London police said in February that four people had been arrested and that 'a large amount of cash, luxury watches and jewellery were found during searches of properties, all of which were seized'. All people arrested have been released on bail and inquiries continue. There have been no charges. The Times reported this month that 79th Group's board included a former senior HM Revenue & Customs official who was in charge of combating fraud for the tax office. Andy Cole, former director of specialist investigations at HMRC, was a non-executive adviser. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Cole or that he is being investigated. He has not been arrested. Administrators from Grant Thornton have told 79th Group investors that 'we believe this is a Ponzi', the term for a fraudulent investment scheme in which early investors are paid with money from later investors rather than legitimate business activities. Banks have a regulatory duty to counter the risk that they might be used to further financial crime. Lenders face strict 'know your customer' and anti-money laundering rules; adherence requires due diligence, transaction monitoring and reporting of suspicious activity. Three sets of insolvency firms are engaged on the case. Administrators are liaising with NatWest over the outstanding charge owed to the bank, which has said it is not in a position to release it, according to its report. In 2021, NatWest was fined £264.8 million for anti-money laundering failures related to the gold trading business Fowler Oldfield. This month Barclays was fined £39.3 million for failing to tackle financial crime risks in its dealings with Stunt & Co, which received £46.8 million from Fowler Oldfield.
Times
4 hours ago
- Times
How to make Great British Railways a success
Before Labour ministers choose slick slogans for their new state-run trains they should recall Henry Ford's words: 'Nothing happens until somebody sells something.' Contrary to what some in the rail sector and Whitehall seem to think, rail services cannot exist without their passengers — what they want and what they are prepared to pay. A herculean effort to win more customers from the airlines and road users is essential. Britain's railways are at a watershed. Under privatisation, passenger journeys almost doubled. By the 2010s, private franchises were running three times as many trains between London and Manchester as the old British Rail (BR) had in the early 1990s. During the two decades between privatisation and the pandemic, passenger journeys increased by 107 per cent and services by 32 per cent. Passenger satisfaction in Britain was higher than for any other major European railway. Revenue increased by 145 per cent in real terms, compared with only a 16 per cent rise in operating costs, and £14 billion of private investment went into improving the train fleet. • Ministers heading for union clash in bid for hi-tech rail travel Privatisation introduced innovations in marketing, ticketing and operational efficiency. The volume of rail travel in Britain rose to a level not seen since the 1930s, on a network half the size and with a very good safety record. The pandemic was devastating for rail. It wasn't just that train travel collapsed during the lockdowns, requiring subsidies of £20.5 billion in 2023-24 prices) to cover losses. People's travel and working behaviour changed, probably for ever. Traditional flows of revenue from business travel, first class and five-day commuter season tickets, particularly in London and the southeast, have fallen away. In the year to March only 13 per cent of journeys were made using season tickets, compared with 34 per cent before the pandemic. Even though passenger numbers are close to 100 per cent of pre-pandemic levels, revenue is still down by £1.4 billion, at 89.1 per cent. Passengers are paying less to travel outside the old peaks. The taxpayer continues to cover an unacceptably high annual subsidy of £12 billion for a sector that only delivers 2 per cent of all journeys taken by the public. Consequently, ministers must now prioritise growth as they prepare to introduce the bill to create the state-owned Great British Railways (GBR), almost 80 years after Clement Attlee first nationalised rail. Without a ruthless focus on what passengers want alongside a demand-led model, a spiral of decline — higher subsidy and fares — could easily take root. GBR risks being a solution in search of a problem and morphing into the ghost of BR unless ministers develop a viable long-term vision. New research from the Centre for Policy Studies highlights four key areas which, if supported, would deliver more passengers, more income and better services for passengers. • Great British Railways 'won't be run by civil servants' First, ministers should support a mixed model across the intercity high-speed network so GBR trains faces competition from non-subsidised 'open access' operators. For 25 years this model has successfully delivered passenger growth and satisfaction on the East Coast Main Line between London, the northeast and Scotland. It has meant better services, more routes, faster trains and cheaper tickets while also bringing more passengers to the route. This has led to new, popular rail operators entering the market, which has pushed the dominant, government-run train operator, LNER, to deliver better services for its customers. European railways that have copied this successful model have seen a 40 per cent increase in passengers and fare reductions of between 20 and 60 per cent. Second, GBR should not regulate itself, especially as the white paper proposes taking key sector powers away from the independent Office of Rail and Road. In no other regulated sector does the dominant market operator also control and deliver key elements of its own regulation, such as decisions on market access and charging. This could have huge implications for growth, open access and more rail freight. Only last week the environment secretary slammed the water companies for 'marking their own homework' and pledged to end 'operator self-monitoring'. But there is a risk that this will become the case on the railways. Third, GBR must adopt an unforgiving focus on making train travel as easy, cheap and user-friendly as possible, not least when designing a new GBR ticketing app to replace those of existing train companies. In addition to competing with popular ticketing sites it must be designed by the world's leading retail software companies rather than civil servants. GBR should deliver a 'Rail Miles' loyalty scheme, which is years overdue and could be linked with purchases made in the hospitality and retail sectors. • The Times View: Prejudice against private train operators is misguided Fourth, the vast 52,000-hectare railway estate can and must generate much more income. Commercial and residential development, renewable energy generation, light parcel freight, health hubs at stations alongside a higher-quality retail offer are all underused sources of income. We must learn from countries such as Japan, where railways earn at least one third of their revenue from non-ticket sources. Rail can and must be at the centre of Britain's industrial, employment, housing and regeneration strategies. The ghost of BR hangs over GBR. But if the passenger is put first and proven models are embraced then the future could be very different. Rail might not get another chance. Tony Lodge is a research fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies and author of Rail's Last Chance, published today by the CPS
