Which area of London for first time buyer?
Which area of London for first time buyer?
Author
Discussion

Codswallop

Original Poster:

5,257 posts

218 months

Friday 19th August 2011
quotequote all
I'm due to be moving to London soon for work, and would like to get on the market there and buy my own place. I've never lived in London before and don't know the areas very well though.

Knowing what a font of knowledge PH is, I thought I'd post up my requirements and see what advice the collective intellect here has to offer smile

So I'm looking to spend in the region of £200,000 - £250,000, would like two bedrooms and good transport links. And that's pretty much it. A good rental income would be a bonus as I intend to let one room to earn some money back. An area that has the potential to go up in value would be a bonus in the long run too.

I was originally thinking along the lines of Shoreditch or Whitechapel, but if there are better places to live, I look forward to finding out.

Thanks for any help smile

ianash

3,286 posts

207 months

Friday 19th August 2011
quotequote all
Pretty much any area that featured in the recent riots.

princeperch

8,226 posts

271 months

Friday 19th August 2011
quotequote all
2 bedder for 250k is not easy. Look at clapton, bethnal green, bow and stoke newington.

Digger

16,228 posts

215 months

Friday 19th August 2011
quotequote all
Earlsfield should be doable?

amir_j

3,579 posts

225 months

Friday 19th August 2011
quotequote all
2 bed for 250 with transport links is fine to do.

Capital appreciation will be your main issue as area won't be leafy and unlikely to be near good nurseries and schools.

Ungarsee

372 posts

243 months

Friday 19th August 2011
quotequote all
If you're willing to go south of the river then crystal palace would fit the bill. Big park, loads of independent shops on 'the triangle', and great pubs. It has a bad rap based on about 10+ years ago but is now a great place to live and having lived in both i'd call it a poor mans clapham/balham.

Transport wise it's in zone 3 and you can be in Victoria / London bridge in 20 mins, plus the London overgrounds now open which takes you one stop from canary wharf and onto east and north east London

The Moose

23,573 posts

233 months

Saturday 20th August 2011
quotequote all
So, what about if the price was £350k, as opposed to £250k?

Same conditions otherwise?!

dudleybloke

20,553 posts

210 months

Saturday 20th August 2011
quotequote all
tipton

Irish

3,991 posts

263 months

Saturday 20th August 2011
quotequote all
Isle of Dogs. Particularly if you work in the Wharf of City. 4 years here now (bought a house) and love it. Finally starting to get some bars and restauraunts around the bottom of the Island. Short walk to Greenwich. Under-rated IMHO.

Murdoc

364 posts

213 months

Sunday 21st August 2011
quotequote all
dudleybloke said:
tipton
Ahhh, the Venice of the Black Country.

mattdaniels

7,362 posts

306 months

Sunday 21st August 2011
quotequote all
Two bed place for 250K is easily do-able.

My 3-bed house in Bromley is worth about £250K. Have a search around the south east London area - plenty of properties available in budget and if you work in the City or Canary Wharf the transport links are good.

Codswallop

Original Poster:

5,257 posts

218 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
Thank you for all the suggestions guys. I will be working in King's College Hospital (for the time being at least), and have done a bit more research on the areas you have all suggested. I think North London looks nicer, and have especially fallen for the Isle of Dogs area (despite the daft name).

I've got my eye on flats such as this one for example.

Prices look very resonable given the location, and transport links seem good. I'm going to short term rent in that area while I hunt for properties and see if I get on with the area. It will also be easier to scope out other areas when I'm more local.

Do people think this area is likely to experience price increase over the coming decade? Given all the businesses around, I should hope it would, hence why I'm especially interested in that area.

jdw1234

6,021 posts

239 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
Codswallop said:
Thank you for all the suggestions guys. I will be working in King's College Hospital (for the time being at least), and have done a bit more research on the areas you have all suggested. I think North London looks nicer, and have especially fallen for the Isle of Dogs area (despite the daft name).

I've got my eye on flats such as this one for example.

Prices look very resonable given the location, and transport links seem good. I'm going to short term rent in that area while I hunt for properties and see if I get on with the area. It will also be easier to scope out other areas when I'm more local.

Do people think this area is likely to experience price increase over the coming decade? Given all the businesses around, I should hope it would, hence why I'm especially interested in that area.
I used to live in Limehouse.

I think it has long peaked in value.

The conservation area round York Square is nice, but surrounded by horrible areas.

Rule for Limehouse:

South of A1203 = nice.
North of A1203 = horrible (with the exception of some roads in conservation area).

However, wherever you live you are not far from ferral innit gangs.

By the way, the building you link to is rough rough rough.

Very convenient for transport though.


Irish

3,991 posts

263 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
jdw1234 said:
I used to live in Limehouse.

I think it has long peaked in value.

The conservation area round York Square is nice, but surrounded by horrible areas.

Rule for Limehouse:

South of A1203 = nice.
North of A1203 = horrible (with the exception of some roads in conservation area).

However, wherever you live you are not far from ferral innit gangs.

By the way, the building you link to is rough rough rough.

Very convenient for transport though.
Seconded. There be dragons in E1. The island is nice though.

A

Bebop Beru

157 posts

176 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
mattdaniels said:
Two bed place for 250K is easily do-able.

My 3-bed house in Bromley is worth about £250K. Have a search around the south east London area - plenty of properties available in budget and if you work in the City or Canary Wharf the transport links are good.
Depends on how "in-London" the OP wants to be. Bromley is in Kent. For what it's worth, I'd look at that sort of area (zone 4-5) near a large station, like Bromley.

If he wants to be a lot further in, it's a struggle to find somewhere nice with 2 beds for £250k.

Codswallop

Original Poster:

5,257 posts

218 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
jdw1234 said:
I used to live in Limehouse.

I think it has long peaked in value.

The conservation area round York Square is nice, but surrounded by horrible areas.

Rule for Limehouse:

South of A1203 = nice.
North of A1203 = horrible (with the exception of some roads in conservation area).

However, wherever you live you are not far from ferral innit gangs.

By the way, the building you link to is rough rough rough.

Very convenient for transport though.
Thanks for the info jdw1234 and Irish. Looking on Rightmove, there does not appear to be much of a price differential between the North and South parts of the A1203.

I thought that given prices around Limehouse are about the same as similar properties in other less central areas that were suggested in this thread, that Limehouse et al. were undervalued.

I'm flexible on which part of London to look in, but ultimately I want to try and get a place in an area that will maximise the chances of the property increasing in value. Potential for rental income is also a consideration, as I would like to let the spare room while I am living in the property, and let both rooms if I move. This is very much likely to be a long term investment property.

So is it a case of the more central, the more likely rental income and capital appreciation are?

Codswallop

Original Poster:

5,257 posts

218 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
Bebop Beru said:
Depends on how "in-London" the OP wants to be. Bromley is in Kent. For what it's worth, I'd look at that sort of area (zone 4-5) near a large station, like Bromley.

If he wants to be a lot further in, it's a struggle to find somewhere nice with 2 beds for £250k.
My dad has a buy-to-let property in Rochester, and has offered me a room there, but I'd rather be more London based. Again, my thinking is, that if I can find an area of London that is a wee bit rough, but next to a good area, then in all likelihood, the good area will over time drag up the slightly worse neighbour. Or at least that's my thinking as people spread from the more expensive parts biggrin

I don't really ever see London going downhill (and if it does, the rest of the UK would no doubt come off even worse), so see it as a safe(ish) first step.

Or are my thoughts way out?

Codswallop

Original Poster:

5,257 posts

218 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
jdw1234 said:
By the way, the building you link to is rough rough rough.
Out of curiosity, what makes that particular building rough?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/prope...

Looks nice enough in the photos. If lots of lovely people (such as myself) move into a rough building, will that not make the prices rise? biggrin

Is every building very different in its' demographic population?

ETA: sorry for all the questions.

kingston12

5,688 posts

181 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
Codswallop said:
I don't really ever see London going downhill (and if it does, the rest of the UK would no doubt come off even worse), so see it as a safe(ish) first step.

Or are my thoughts way out?
I think you are right that London will always do better than the rest of the country, but I don't think that we are in for another decade of 10% annual price increases.

There are the super-rich parts of London favoured by Russian oliogarchs, politicians and premiership footballers - prices in these areas are a law unto themselves and there is no reason why they can't continue rising.

The rest of London (where normal people live) has struggled over the last few years as prices have gone up to a ridiculous multiple of normal salaries and the banks have withdrawn lots of the mortgage lending.

Until salaries start rocketing or the banks start lending again, it is hard to see prices going up much. It is equally hard to see either of these things happening at the moment!

I don't think that buying a house is necessarily a bad idea at the moment, but I wouldn't recommend it if your prime interest is investment because prices may not go up for a while.

kingston12

5,688 posts

181 months

Wednesday 31st August 2011
quotequote all
Codswallop said:
Out of curiosity, what makes that particular building rough?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/prope...

Looks nice enough in the photos. If lots of lovely people (such as myself) move into a rough building, will that not make the prices rise? biggrin

Is every building very different in its' demographic population?

ETA: sorry for all the questions.
With council blocks such as this one, it normally depends on what proportion of the block has been sold off to private owners.

That is not to say that a private owner will alway be nice and a council tenant will always be nasty, but it tends to be more likely to work that way. The other disadvantage is that the council is at liberty to move anyone they like in, so you never know who you will get.

As more nice people move in, the block will improve, but it can take many years, and I doubt you'd want to be in the middle of it whilst it improves.