Cheapest areas to live in the UK including town with £120k homes and £599 rents – does your city make the list?
The cost of buying and renting has risen dramatically across the country in recent years, with wages failing to keep pace.
1
A new nationwide study now shows the cheapest areas to live in the UK compared to salaries, so you can find out if where you live is actually affordable - or whether it may be time to move.
Burnley, Lancashire, is Britain's most affordable place to live, according to Investing Insiders' cost of living index.
Its average house price is £120,719, while the average monthly cost of rent is £599.
The median weekly salary of the town's residents is £530, meaning the average house price is just under 4.5 times the amount the average person earns in a year there (£27,565.20).
It also takes locals just over a week to cover the average rent price on the median salary.
Kingston-upon-Hull came in second place, with the East Yorkshire city having higher weekly wages than Burnley at an average of £575.50.
However, house prices are more expensive at an average of £131,374, while average monthly rents are £642.
Nine out of the 10 cheapest places to live are located in Wales or the North of England, while the 10 most expensive places are all found in and around London.
Taking the third spot was Hartlepool, with the cheapest average monthly rent out of the top 10 at £546, while average house prices are £136,148.
But it also has the lowest weekly wage at £523.20.
5 things to check before applying for a mortgage
Cumberland came in fourth place, in part thanks to its weekly wages of £612.30, which were the highest out of the top 10.
Average house prices in the North West town are £165,099, and rent is £618 a month, which are both higher than in the other most affordable places.
Neath Port Talbot in South Wales is in fifth place, with wages averaging £601.90 per week, but house prices are also higher than most in the top 10 at £161,605.
Blaenau Gwent is in sixth place, ahead of Hyndburn and then County Durham.
Stoke-on-Trent came in ninth, and Sunderland rounds off the top 10.
The study also looked at the most expensive places to live in the UK, with the top 10 least affordable all in the capital.
The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea is the most expensive place to live, with average house prices of £1,345,813 and average monthly private rent of £3,663, compared to a median weekly salary of £703.70.
Westminster, Camden, Hammersmith and Fulham, and Richmond upon Thames make up the bottom five, as each has an average house price of at least £750,000.
Investing Insiders founder Antonia Medlicott said: "These figures lay bare the widening gap between the UK's most and least affordable housing markets.
"It's shocking that a young professional in Westminster needs over
twenty years of net income to buy a typical flat, while someone in Sunderland can do the same in under five.
"Whether you're saving for a first home or debating a relocation, these numbers prove there are realistic paths to ownership, if you know where to look and how to play the system."
Lifetime ISA 'still in good working order'
The study also revealed that the Lifetime ISA cap - which means savers can only buy a house up to the value of £450,000 - still covers 85 per cent of areas in the UK.
It found that house prices in 54 out of 350 local authorities exceed the limit, including Westminster, Oxford, and Cambridge.
There have been calls to reform Lifetime ISAs in recent years, with experts and campaigners arguing that the current cap has not kept up with rising house prices and has led to thousands missing out on buying their first home.
The £450,000 limit has not changed since the LISA was first introduced in 2017.
'It's great to see that the Lifetime ISA is still in good working order for 85 per cent of the UK, and first-time buyers should look to maximise their usage of the £4,000 a year allowance," Ms Medlicott adds.
'However, for those who have reached that limit, already own a home, or are in an area where the house will exceed the £450,000 limit, it can be confusing what to do.
"Whilst there are many options available, a Stocks & Shares ISA can be hugely beneficial, as it is most useful when used for the long term, like owning a home.
'The historical performance shows that these investments are great when aiming for larger life goals such as saving for a home, and can allow you to achieve the necessary funds much quicker for a deposit.'
How to save for a home deposit
IT can be overwhelming to know where to even start when it comes to saving for a home deposit
Our Senior Consumer Reporter Blathnaid Corless shares some tips on how you can save to get on the housing ladder.
The first thing you'll need to do is set a savings target. A house deposit is typically 5-10% of the property value, so take a look at the average house prices in the areas you want to live and calculate how much you'll need to save.
From there, you should analyse your monthly or weekly spending to find areas where you could cut costs, such as eating out and takeaways, or any subscriptions you don't use.
You could cut the costs of your household bills by comparing providers for energy, internet and other utilities. Price comparison sites such as USwitch and MoneySuperMarket can compare prices for you to help you find the best deal.
Make sure you have the right savings account to maximise your money. A Lifetime ISA allows you to save up to £4,000 per year and receive a 25% government bonus.
However, you can only use this to buy a house worth up to £450,000, so it may not be the best option if you live in an expensive area or you want to buy a bigger property.
Some banks offer fixed-term or regular savings accounts with competitive rates which could also help you save.
If you're renting, you could also consider moving back in with parents or other family on a temporary basis to help you save.
.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
The Oyster cards affected by price increases
Transport for London (TfL) has increased the price of London 's Oyster cards for the first time in a decade, attributing the rises to increasing operational costs. The application fee for the 60+ London Oyster card has seen the largest increase, almost doubling from £20 to £35. Fees for the annual eligibility check and replacement 60+ photocards have also risen from £10 to £18, with increases also applied to various Zip photocards. From 7 September, the cost of new Oyster cards and Visitor Oyster cards will increase from £7 to £10. Michael Roberts, Chief Executive of London TravelWatch, criticised the increases, stating they are unwelcome news for Londoners facing the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
QUENTIN LETTS: With his drip dry suburban ways, there's something furtive about the Governor
Bank managers are often thought stodgy presences. But as Andrew Bailey demonstrated at the treasury select committee, they are crazily optimistic loan sharks. Their purpose in life is to persuade happy people to borrow money, which frequently brings misery. 'It'll be fine,' they say. Bank managers are maniacs. Outwardly Mr Bailey is unexciting. They're always the most dangerous. The sober socks, bland suit, Pooterish manner, and a retinue of six clerical mice who traipse after him with earnest haircuts and dark shoes: it is a brilliant disguise. We think, 'he'll be safe', but we'd be safer being driven home from an all-night bender by the late Ayrton Senna. Mr Bailey is governor of the Bank of England. His time in charge has so far seen the mad printing of money, blindness to inflation after lockdown and a regulatory laxness that hastened the Truss government's destruction. Yesterday he was asked if Rachel Reeves was borrowing too much. Noooo, said Mr Bailey. Everything's under control. He slipped easily into jargon mode, burbling that yield curves were steeper across the world. As he did this he narrowed his eyes a little to convey shrewd expertise. He placed his elbows on the witness table and touched the skin of his brow, quite the expert intellectual. Carry on borrowing, Chancellor. It's all going swimmingly. That was his siren song. Dame Meg Hillier (Lab), chairman of the committee, was surprised. 'You sound unconcerned,' honked Mother-Goose Meg. Mr Bailey, suppressing just a hint of indigestion: 'I'm not unconcerned. It's reflective of conditions. There is an uncertainty in geopolitics, I'd say.' Dame Meg boggled a bit at his calm tone. We were talking here about trillions of pounds and an interest bill that could bankrupt us. Mr Bailey soothed Dame Meg with a not-quite convincing smile. He noted that the market capitalisation of a single US firm is now greater than Britain's gross domestic product. Was that meant to be reassuring? Unlike his talcum-powdered predecessor Mark Carney this Bank governor is not a magnetic figure. When he enters a room, people do not hush. When Mr Carney shimmered down a corridor, you could almost hear Sade's 'Smooth Operator'. Mr Bailey, with his crinkly hairdo and drip-dry, suburban ways, lacks charisma. He fiddles with his chin and neck when talking. His fingers twiddle with a slender ballpoint pen. There's something not quite right about him. Something flawed. Furtive. When Ms Reeves first started to meet him, she possibly suspected that she was the senior partner in the relationship. Now, as she looks at our economy going down the plughole, she must wish she had never listened to his burbling reassurances. He was accompanied by two external members of the Bank's financial policy committee. Carolyn Wilkins, a Canadian policy wonk, was largely inaudible. Prof Randall Kroszner, known as 'Randy', sat on the very edge of his chair, his spine ramrod straight. Randy was Norman R. Bobins professor of economics at Chicago university, a director of the George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the John M. Olin visiting fellow of law at Chicago law school. Randy turns left on aeroplanes. We possibly need to keep Rachel Reeves away from such people. It being the last day of term, Westminster was pretty empty. The education committee was holding an inquiry about truancy. Jolly bad luck. It meant most of them had to turn up. And in the Commons chamber Wes Streeting took health questions. Wes is already quite bronzé. Not a fleck of grey taints his inky, modishly ridged fringe. Add a rich, blue suit and just a hint of tummy. During longueurs he effortlessly attended to his mobile telephone. He paid handsome tribute to his Tory shadow, Edward Argar, who is retiring from the front bench. And he relished talking about the resident doctors' strike, which we must all hope he wins. The Starmer Government has had a hellish first year but little Wes is loving life.
Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Treasury boss gets £20k bonus as growth slumps and taxes soar
The Treasury's top civil servant has been handed a bonus of up to £20,000, despite Britain's stalling growth and soaring taxes. James Bowler, the most senior official managing the UK's economy, received the uplift last year on top of a £10,000 pay rise and £5,000 pension boost, taking his total remuneration to roughly £350,000. Jessica Glover, the Treasury's director of growth and productivity, was also handed a bonus of up to £15,000 on top of a salary rise of roughly £10,000, taking her total pay including pensions to around £280,000. It comes as Britain braces for a growth slump and unemployment hits its highest rate since the pandemic in the wake of Rachel Reeves ' tax raid on businesses. Critics said the Treasury should not be rewarding 'bureaucrats' presiding over an economy that was 'performing atrociously' and warned taxpayers would be 'gobsmacked' by the revelations. The pay rises for Mr Bowler, who took on the top Treasury job in 2022, and Ms Glover, who was appointed to her role in 2023, were revealed in the department's annual accounts for 2024-25. They showed that Mr Bowler received a total salary of between £195,000 and £200,000 last year, up from £185,000-£190,000 in 2023-24. He was also handed a bonus of between £15,000 and £20,000, which he did not receive last year, and pension benefits totalling £133,000, taking his total remuneration to between £345,000 and £350,000. Ms Glover received a salary of £145,000-£150,000 last year, up from a full-time equivalent of £135,000-£140,000 the year before, as well as a bonus of £10,000-£15,000 and pension benefits of £117,000. It comes just weeks after the Governor of the Bank of England poured cold water on the Chancellor's claim that Britain's economy has turned a corner, warning that growth is slowing as high taxes bite. Official figures show GDP grew faster than expected in the three months of the year, but things are expected to slow down in the second quarter. The number of people in jobs has also slumped at the fastest rate since the pandemic in the wake of Ms Reeves' tax raid on businesses at last year's Budget. Meanwhile, experts have warned that Britain has suffered an 'almost unprecedented' plunge in productivity over the past five years in another setback for the Chancellor's growth ambitions. Richard Tice, the deputy leader of Reform UK, told The Telegraph: 'The Treasury seem confused. Performance-related bonuses are for when things get better not worse. 'Perhaps their failure to grasp this simple concept is why the country is going bust if they are in charge of our finances?' Darwin Friend, the head of research at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: 'It should be a source of some embarrassment for the Treasury that they're handing out pay rises and bonuses to senior staff. 'The UK's economy has been performing atrociously over the past year, and while the Chancellor is the primary person to blame taxpayers will still be gobsmacked that her bureaucrats are seeing their pay packets boosted. 'The Treasury should be strictly linking the pay of all staff to economic performance from now on.' Mr Bowler was unveiled as the Treasury's permanent secretary during Liz Truss' short premiership in 2022, taking over from Sir Tom Scholar. He has spent much of his career in the department, with past briefs including director general for public spending and director general for tax and welfare. He also served as principal private secretary to both Lord Darling and Gordon Brown when they were chancellor, as well as more recently playing a senior role in the Covid taskforce. He was tipped to become the Cabinet secretary, the most senior civil servant in the country, when Ms Truss took over, but Lord Case, who has since stepped down, was kept in post instead. A Government spokesman said: 'This pay increase is in line with those of permanent secretaries across Whitehall. 'Like all others, it was set for 2024-25 in line with the recommendations of the independent Senior Salaries Review Body - with a robust framework in place to assess pay and performance. 'Decisions this Government has taken to restore economic stability have seen interest rates cut four times, a pay rise for three million workers, 380,000 jobs created and a record £120 billion in private investment coming into the UK in the past year, while the UK was also the fastest growing economy in the G7 in Q1 2025.'
