Rented normally, it costs you £701 a month. That is £8,409 a year, every year you hold it.

Will it pay?Calculator

The mortgage alone costs more than the whole rent — you top up £701 a month

It is £701 a month short. Borrowing £129,371 less would close that shortfall — which is £129,371 more cash at the start, on top of the deposit.

£886 mortgage

£490 running

£702 rent in£701 short

£175 of that is a guess — no service charge published.

□ service charge not published2 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

£73,530 + refurb costs

And about £42,046 more over five years, because it loses £701 every month you hold it — before any repair. That already assumes the rent never falls.

£73,530 to buy it

deposit · stamp duty · solicitor · fees~£10,764, unseen

□ works not inspected

What would have to be true?The search

No offer makes this pay

Even at £130,800 — well below the £218,000 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 £130,800

Is the price right?The deeds

Last sold for £240,000 in 2012

Nothing nearby is comparable, but asking is 9% less than the £240,000 paid for it in 2012.

□ this address’s own deeds, no comparable saleHM Land Registry Price Paid Data

What will the rent borrow?Lender test

The rent carries £74,483 of the £163,500 loan

That £89,017 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 £77,100. Lenders test the rent at 7.5% and need it to cover 145% of the payment.

£1,482 needed

more than the £675 rent

stressed at 7.5%, 145% cover

◧ rent after empty weeks £675PRA-style test

How big is it, really?The plan

One figure, and nothing checking it 1,163 sq ft

The advert and the survey disagree — open for both figures and the gap.

■ area measured on site

Is it a good location?Open the map

Durham, DH2 3RG

1 of 3 schools in this postcode area rated Good or Outstanding and flood risk checking… — open for the map, the schools and the rest.

Article 4Planning permission required to let by the room

■ 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 · 2 came back clear · 3 we could not check · 2 do not apply to this property

■ from council licensing registerlisting last seen 15 Sep 2026

Which strategy wins?The ways to run it

Every way loses money — Standard rental loses least, at £701 a month

Let it to the council: £2,196 a year less, but they keep paying when it is empty.

Standard rental−£701 · £84,294 in

Guaranteed council rent−£884 · £84,294 in

Short-stay let−£916 · £84,294 in

23 nearby short-lets within 20 km · medium confidence

Housing-benefit rent−£974 · £84,294 in

Each row: money kept a month, then the cash it ties up. Not compared: Rent by the room (only 2 bedrooms) · Do it up, then remortgage (pays back at the remortgage) · 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?The five-year sums

−£51,136 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 25% in the price would leave nothing from a sale after selling costs, and you would still owe the lender any shortfall. That is the £84,294 you put in. The 5-year fix runs past this 5-year hold, so the rate reset comes after it.

◧ 2.0%/yr growth assumed