Latest news with #renting
The Independent
2 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Monthly rents rise £221 over three years – here's how much they've gone up in your area
The cost of renting in the UK has seen a sharp rise over the last few years, new data shows, increasing by an average £221 a month in just three years. This makes the cost of renting 21 per cent more expensive than three years ago, the analysis by Zoopla finds, far outstripping inflation. The average monthly rent in spring was £1,283, figures from the property website show. London continues to be the UK's most expensive city for renters, at an average £2,101 a month in 2025. This is followed by Oxford (£1,747), Brighton (£1,640) and Cambridge (£1,600), the data shows. Meanwhile, northern areas Burnley (£625), Hull (£652) and Grimbsy (£656) have the cheapest rents. However, rental growth has varied across different areas of the UK in this time, with some surprising areas seeing prices rise much faster than others. Over the last three years, renters in Rochdale saw the highest relative increase, with average costs rising 34.3 per cent per. This brought the average rent from £668 in 2022 to £897 in 2025. This was followed by Bolton (31.5 per cent), Wigan (31.1 per cent), and Blackburn (29.1 per cent), pointing to a trend of quicker rising rents in the North West. However, annual growth in average rents for new tenancies in the UK is actually now slowing, Zoopla reports. Its report shows that growth has shrunk from 6.4 per cent last year, to 2.8 per cent in the year to April. But the growth in rental prices since 2022 means that private tenants have seen a greater increase in their monthly housing costs since 2022 than mortgaged homeowners, the property site adds. Its figures also show that mortgage repayments for an average outstanding loan currently sits at £1,154 per month – £129 more than the average rent. Richard Donnell, executive director at Zoopla, said: 'A shift to higher mortgage rates raised alarm over how mortgagees would be able to afford higher repayments over the last three years. The sales market has been resilient thanks to mortgage regulations that ensured borrowers could afford higher mortgage rates. 'Renters have faced similarly steep increases in the cost of renting in recent years with rents pushed higher on string demand and limited supply of homes for rent which has hit lower income renters hardest. 'The quickest way to alleviate high rents is to grow the stock of homes for rent in both the social and private rented sectors. Growing housing supply is a key Government target and its vital that the stock of rented homes is expanded across all tenures.'
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
This California town tops the most expensive rental market in the nation for third year running
Renting in Santa Cruz, California now requires a stifling income of more than $168,000 just to rent a two-bedroom, a figure that makes it the most unaffordable market in the nation for the third year in a row. In the Santa Cruz area, located on the Central Coast about 75 miles south of San Francisco, the hourly pay needed to afford a modest two-bedroom has risen from $63.33 in 2023 to $81.21 in 2025, according to the National Low-Income Housing Coalition's 2025 Out of Reach report. This is up nearly 30% since 2023, when they were first put at the top of the list. That means a renter must now earn $168,920 a year to be able to afford a modest two-bedroom at fair market rent in the metro area, the report shows. That would be a max of $4,223 a month in rent to stay under 30% of their gross income. In California, where the minimum wage is $16.50, that's the equivalent of working 4.9 full-time In-n-out Heiress Lynsi Snyder And Family Leaving California For Tennessee The report finds that the typical renter doesn't come close. The average renter in Santa Cruz County earns $22.13 an hour. At that rate, it would take about 3.7 full-time jobs to afford an apartment."This is a No. 1 we don't want to be," said Elaine Johnson, executive director of Housing Santa Cruz County to the Santa Cruz Sentinel. "This is an all-hands-on-deck kind of time for everyone involved."California state dominates affordability rankings, according to the Out of Reach report. The Golden State is home to eight of the ten most expensive metro areas, including San Jose, San Francisco, Salinas, and Santa Barbara. Statewide, the average housing wage for a two-bedroom apartment is nearly $50 per hour, which is the highest of any U.S. state. Timeline Of California's Yearslong And 'Disastrously Overpriced' High-speed Rail Project At the current minimum wage, a full-time California worker would need to put in 120 hours a week to afford the average two-bedroom apartment. According to the report, "Nowhere in the United States—no state, metropolitan area, or county—can a full-time minimum-wage worker afford a modest two-bedroom rental home."The report attributes the problem to a severe and persistent supply shortage, estimating a national gap of 7.1 million affordable rental homes for extremely low-income or 'ELI' say California's housing market is also hindered by overlapping layers of regulation."CEQA[California Environmental Quality Act] and restrictive zoning regulations are key contributors to California's housing shortage," said Dr. Wayne Winegarden, senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute. "Prevailing wage mandates coupled with expensive environmental mandates... further inflates housing costs." Read On The Fox Business App Santa Cruz County Republican Party Chair Mike Lelieur told FOX Business the affordability crisis is a direct result of decades of progressive policy. "The local planning department has made it so outrageously expensive to build that it's just not profitable unless you're backed by a big corporate developer," Lelieur said. "Then you add CEQA, coastal commission reviews, endless permit delays, and greenbelt restrictions. It's a bureaucratic blockade by design." He also criticized the University of California, Santa Cruz, for expanding its student population faster than it builds housing. "UCSC keeps expanding, but they're not building dorms fast enough. So students flood the local market and landlords jack up rents — because mom and dad are paying the bill," he Fox Business On The Go"This is a housing crisis created by policy," Lelieur said. "And unless we change course, it's only going to get worse."The Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk and the Santa Cruz County Business Council did not immediately respond to FOX Business' request for full report can be found at article source: This California town tops the most expensive rental market in the nation for third year running Solve the daily Crossword
CBS News
5 days ago
- Business
- CBS News
Pittsburgh is the only U.S. city where it's cheaper to buy a home than rent, report says
Pittsburgh is the only city where it's cheaper to buy a home than rent, according to a new report. says renting is more affordable than buying in 49 of the 50 largest U.S. cities, except for Pittsburgh. According to June rental report, leasing a median home in Pittsburgh cost $1,473 last month, which is well below the national median asking rent of $1,711. Meanwhile, purchasing a starter home in the Steel City costs $1,362 a month. Economists said they got that figure by assuming a 9% down payment with a 30-year fixed mortgage, before tacking on HOA fees, taxes and homeowners insurance. Buying over renting in Pittsburgh will result in a monthly savings of $111, which seems like a pretty good deal when you consider that in 49 of 50 top metros, buying a starter home costs $908 more than renting one in June. "Pittsburgh remains one of the most affordable places in the U.S. to live and to buy a home," senior economic research analyst Hannah Jones said on the website. "It's the only major market where buying a home is cheaper than renting, and one of just three large metros where a median-income household can afford a median-priced home." says since 2019, home prices in Pittsburgh have gone up about 31% while rents have jumped about 40%, pushing the cost of renting beyond the cost of buying.
Daily Mail
7 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Renters could end up £340,000 worse off than homeowners over 30 years
Renters end up hundreds of thousands of pounds worse off than home owners in the long term, a new study has claimed. Renting rather than owning in England could result in the average person being £338,170 poorer over three decades, according to the analysis by mortgage broker, Mortgage Advice Bureau. The research compared the average upfront and ongoing costs of both renting and owning, using publicly available data from sources including Zoopla, the Office for National Statistics and the UK Government. It compared the average cost of renting versus buying over various time horizons, and found that within two years, homeowners already start to be better off. As annual rent payments rise with time and mortgage payments remain largely fixed, the gap between the cost of renting and owning a home rises as time goes on. After 10 years it is estimated homeowners could be up to £12,157 better off than renters. The study then looks at what would happen if a homeowner took the money they had 'saved' compared to a renter, and invested it. If they did, that sum could grow to £14,358 in ten years, generating an additional gain of £2,202. By year 14, those invested savings could reach £39,539 – enough to fully recoup a typical first-time buyer deposit. And by year 16, invested savings could grow to £55,547 – enough, for example, to repay the average student loan debt in England. Over a full 30-year period, it is estimated that homeowners could save £206,031 in housing costs alone, not including house price appreciation. If these savings were gradually invested over time, they could yield an additional £132,139, taking the total missed financial opportunity for renters to £338,170. According to the study this means that after 30 years, the financial cost of renting versus homeownership could reach up to £30.88 per day, or £11,272 each year. Bristol has biggest wealth gap In some cities, the gap is even wider. In London, the missed opportunity rises to £540,687 – or nearly £50 per day. In Bristol, renters could miss out on a staggering £573,110 of wealth over 30 years, while in Manchester, the figure reaches £428,223. Interestingly, home buyers could save more in Bristol than in London because the monthly difference between rent and mortgage payments is much greater in Bristol. Homeowners there see bigger savings earlier on. How do house price rises impact wealth? The research did not include potential house price growth as part of the calculations. Over the past 30 years, the average UK property price has risen by 414 per cent from £51,617 to £265,497. While this level of growth may not repeat itself over the next 30 years, it is certainly more likely that house prices will rise over the next three decades. However, it did include typical one-off costs such as the five-week security deposit paid by renters. For buyers it included the typical deposit, valuation fees, mortgage arrangement fees, home survey fees, solicitor fees and buildings insurance. It also included regular maintenance and repair costs that homeowners have to contend with. It also factored in regular costs for both buyers and renters including council tax, utilities, broadband, contents insurance, TV licence. However, where the study may fall short is stamp duty costs. In terms of stamp duty, the calculations are based on the fact that an average first-time buyer won't pay stamp duty on homes bought for below £300,000. It also does not factor in future moves by either renter or buyer, because it becomes an increasingly difficult calculation with too many variables. Stamp duty costs for movers can be a major financial drain over time as they upsize and downsize. Someone moving to a £300,000 property faces stamp duty costs of £5,000, someone buying a £500,000 home will have to stump up £15,000, while someone moving to a £750,000 property will have to pay £27,500. The cost of renting vs buying Region 30-Year Total Savings (Buy vs Rent) 30-Year Investment Return (If reinvested) Total Missed Opportunity (If renting) Daily Loss From Renting London £319,493 £227,040 £546,533 £49.91 Bristol £331,935 £241,174 £573,110 £52.34 Manchester £248,079 £180.144 £428,233 £39.11 Leeds £134,398 £72,610 £207,008 £18.90 Liverpool £84,375 £49,635 £134,010 £12.24 Birmingham £121,869 £72,336 £194,205 £17.74 Coventry £97,533 £57,574 £155,106 £14.16 Leicester £87,220 £52,871 £140,091 £12.79 Sheffield £44,977 £36,442 £81,419 £7.44 Bradford £8,058 £30,530 £38,588 £3.52 Source: Mortgage Advice Bureau How hard is it to get on the property ladder? Two thirds of renters aspire to buy a home, according to a separate 5,000-strong survey by Censuswide. However, more than a quarter believe they'll never be able to afford it. Ultimately, the challenge of getting on the ladder will depend on where someone lives in the country as well as how much they can afford to save each month. The most commonly cited barriers to homeownership are high property prices, saving for a deposit, job or income insecurity and mortgage eligibility concerns, according to the survey. However, many of these perceived obstacles may be more surmountable than renters realise. For a start, house prices have not risen for the past three years, while average incomes have been going up. The average house price stands at £271,619, according to Nationwide Building Society, which means average prices are still below the peak in August 2022, when they hit £273,751. This has resulted in house prices becoming more affordable when compared with average incomes. In fact, Nationwide says that house prices are more affordable now on average than they were 20 years ago. Between April and June this year, Nationwide revealed the average UK house price was 5.8 times the average annual salary of someone in full time work. This is marginally down on the same three month period in 2005 when the average house price was 5.9 times the average annual full time salary. Over the last 20 years, house prices have increased 73 per cent compared to earnings growth of 76 per cent over the same period. However, affordability has deteriorated from a mortgage cost perspective over the past five years given the sharp rise in interest rates in 2022 and 2023. In July 2020 someone buying with a 20 per cent deposit could bag a five-year rate as low as 1.7 per cent. Now, most buyers are securing mortgage rates around 4 to 5 per cent. The lowest five-year fix for someone buying with a 20 per cent deposit is 4.15 per cent. Someone buying a property in 2020 with a £200,000 mortgage at 1.7 per cent with a 25 year repayment term would have been paying £818 a month. However, someone buying today with a £200,000 mortgage today and a 25 year term on a 4.15 per cent rate can now expect to pay £1,072 a month. Little change: The house price-to-earnings ratio is similar to where it was 20 years ago Mortgage rules are easing up More than half of renters said they would consider buying if mortgage repayments matched their rent, according to a survey by Mortgage Advice Bureau. Ultimately, with rents having risen significantly in recent years, there will be locations where mortgage payments will be lower than rents on like for like properties. Saving up for a deposit is often the biggest barrier. However, many lenders also now offer mortgages with deposits as low as 5-10 per cent. Some even offer 100 per cent mortgage options - though the interest rates on these products can be high. Lenders have also been relaxing mortgage affordability rules in recent months enabling people to borrow more. An average buyer who could have borrowed £200,000 a few months ago could now borrow as much as £240,000, according to Mortgage Advice Bureau. Nationwide is widening access to its 'Helping Hand' mortgage to allow first-time buyers to borrow up to six times their income with deposits as low as 5 per cent. Eligible first-time buyers can now apply for this mortgage with a £30,000 salary, down from £35,000, and joint applicants with a £50,000 combined salary, down from £55,000. For some renters, this could mean they don't have to save as long for a deposit as they may have predicted. The survey revealed that the average time taken to save for a deposit among homeowners was just 2.84 years. In contrast, the average renter has been renting for 7.43 years. Ben Thompson, deputy chief at Mortgage Advice Bureau thinks many long-term renters may have already had the time to save and buy, but haven't acted. 'Our research reveals that many renters are much closer to buying than they realise, despite the barriers they perceive,' said Thompson 'Conditions for aspiring first time buyers have improved considerably over the last year or so. 'It's also possible to borrow quite a lot more now than last year. Therefore, it may well be likely that you can buy your first home much sooner than you think. 'Acting now can lead to many thousands of pounds in long-term savings and investment growth. 'Home ownership builds equity, offers stability, and creates a foundation for future wealth.' How to find a new mortgage Borrowers who need a mortgage because their current fixed rate deal is ending, or they are buying a home, should explore their options as soon as possible. Buy-to-let landlords should also act as soon as they can. Quick mortgage finder links with This is Money's partner L&C > Mortgage rates calculator > Find the right mortgage for you What if I need to remortgage? Borrowers should compare rates, speak to a mortgage broker and be prepared to act. Homeowners can lock in to a new deal six to nine months in advance, often with no obligation to take it. Most mortgage deals allow fees to be added to the loan and only be charged when it is taken out. This means borrowers can secure a rate without paying expensive arrangement fees. Keep in mind that by doing this and not clearing the fee on completion, interest will be paid on the fee amount over the entire term of the loan, so this may not be the best option for everyone. What if I am buying a home? Those with home purchases agreed should also aim to secure rates as soon as possible, so they know exactly what their monthly payments will be. Buyers should avoid overstretching and be aware that house prices may fall, as higher mortgage rates limit people's borrowing ability and buying power. What about buy-to-let landlords Buy-to-let landlords with interest-only mortgages will see a greater jump in monthly costs than homeowners on residential mortgages. This makes remortgaging in plenty of time essential and our partner L&C can help with buy-to-let mortgages too. How to compare mortgage costs The best way to compare mortgage costs and find the right deal for you is to speak to a broker. This is Money has a long-standing partnership with fee-free broker L&C, to provide you with fee-free expert mortgage advice. Interested in seeing today's best mortgage rates? Use This is Money and L&Cs best mortgage rates calculator to show deals matching your home value, mortgage size, term and fixed rate needs. If you're ready to find your next mortgage, why not use L&C's online Mortgage Finder. It will search 1,000's of deals from more than 90 different lenders to discover the best deal for you. > Find your best mortgage deal with This is Money and L&C Be aware that rates can change quickly, however, and so if you need a mortgage or want to compare rates, speak to L&C as soon as possible, so they can help you find the right mortgage for you.
ABC News
7 days ago
- Business
- ABC News
Locals say buying a house in WA's resource-rich Pilbara harder than research suggests
After recent research identified buying a property as a cheaper option than renting in Western Australia's resources-rich Pilbara, those looking to purchase locally say it is easier said than done. While the mining and energy industries have brought plentiful jobs and high wages to the north-west, they have also driven up the cost of living for the remote region's residents. When lenders are asking for deposits of up to 40 per cent and insurance costs are astronomical, families like Harriette Smith's — even with work-based subsidies — are being left behind. While Ms Smith and her family rented through her employer, they were looking for a home to call their own. "We want hooks for them to hang school bags, you know? Maybe one day get a pet and just be able to do things," she said. "One of my kids wants a pink bedroom and a rainbow." But Ms Smith and her husband could not afford a home in the current market, even with subsidies provided by their workplaces. "[We've been saving] on and off for the past five years," Ms Smith said. "I feel like we're getting close to having a deposit, and then a trip to Perth comes up or something comes unexpectedly … and we're not able to afford it. "It's not even just the house price — it's the stamp duty on top of it, and all those extra hidden things that you're not aware of when you get into housing." Pilbara Development Commission chief executive Simon Taylor said saving for a deposit in the region was more complex than in the city. Mr Taylor said the region's homebuyers faced additional challenges. "Incomes are generally much higher in the Pilbara than, say, Perth, but costs of living are higher and that impacts on people's ability to save a deposit," he said. "It's very difficult for people to secure finance, even if they would really like to move into home ownership. "These factors result in very high deposits being required by lenders — often around 30 to 40 per cent of the cost." Building a new home is even more challenging, with the valuation systems employed by banks a limiting factor. "The cost of construction and the land generally exceeds the market value of the property," Mr Taylor said. "That can be by $100,000–$200,000 quite commonly, and banks make an assessment on what they'll lend based on the value, not on the cost." Prospective buyers also face huge insurance premiums in the state's cyclone-prone north. Insurance Council of Australia chief executive Andrew Hall said premiums had increased due to more frequent and severe weather events, while some providers had withdrawn from the region altogether. "We've seen that on top of inflation, which has flown through the building sector and the motor industry," Mr Hall said. "We're also seeing global capital, through reinsurance costs and the like, go up. "Some insurers provide a lot of coverage in northern Australia, while others don't have the network or the infrastructure to support claims in that region." Karratha residents have told the ABC of quotes for home and contents insurance of up to $8,000 for a two-bedroom house. Those employed by the resources industry were often eligible for subsidies, but this was something Mr Taylor said lenders did not always account for. "You need a high deposit and you're stretched for saving, and then part of your effective income is a housing subsidy — but then it can't be taken into account," he said. "If you're trying to save for a house and you're paying high costs and the bank doesn't take account of the housing subsidy in the serviceability, you're in a pretty challenging situation."
