12 September 2007 [0 comments]

Q: 

We have lived in our very large house in a very small village for nearly 25 years, where we have built a life and are very happy. The house now has a very high value in financial terms. However, we are now looking at the prospect of having to make a downsize move, mostly because of the financial implications of owning a house of this size, such as higher heating bills, council tax, insurance and other essential expenditure.

We have looked into the area of equity release schemes but have consistently been told that it is more cost effective to downsize to a smaller property. However, even if we did downsize to such a property, it would still be of a high value in this area. In addition, it would be very expensive to make this move, considering the potential costs involved in moving home alone. We have calculated that it will cost us close to £100,000 to move, taking into account estate agent’s fees, legal fees, stamp duty and various moving costs. This £100,000 is immediately wasted and, on a personal note, we would have to start a new life in our retirement. These factors therefore bring us back
to considering equity release again.

We would require an additional income of up to £20,000 per annum for possibly a ten-year period before we need to move. If the calculation was for a property valued at £1.5 million, we would only need an increase in the property value of around two per cent per year to cover the withdrawal of £20,000 for income and the interest payments.

Would this be the preferable solution in investment terms for our situation, rather than taking the money out of the property by downsizing and then investing the funds elsewhere and paying more tax on the funds that we have released?

P. Buckle,
Dorset

There are currently no comments on this post.