They could very easily do it. They just don't want too, as they don't see why thy should have to make any sacrifices.
they're not saying this though, are they.
They're saying they want to minimise their personal sacrifices without sacrificing what they want for their kids. And I'm sure you do just the same.
grum - MemberAgreed. But I don't think anyone here is jealous of these people
I'm jealous of their money 😆 But not their lives.
But the pair are worried about becoming “financially broken” as the sheer cost of middle-class life in London means they are stretched to the brink. They spend everything they earn – and more.
I fail to see how they can buy a second house and rent it out, earn in the brackets they do, yet not manage their own finances. Tax returns alone must require a reasonable degree of acumen. Even saving all the paperwork for the accountant would require enough nous to say 'hang on, mores going out than coming in. Somethings up'. Perhaps an 8K card they can't clear right now from savings is a clue to them. There are some very very simple things they could do that would resolve this.
worried about becoming “financially broken”
An emotive term that frankly, compared to people using food banks or risking their lives to get to this country under lorries with nothing but the shirts on their backs or borrowing money for food from the likes of Wonga or loan sharks I'm struggling to think counts as a problem or even a worry.
Plus, as both were privately educated, I think it's a reasonable assumption they are going to inherit a reasonable sum. I am aware some people forego their Pilates classes or use supermarket diesel on occasion to afford to privately educate their children, but in general it's an indicator of wealth.
But to be honest I'm starting to think it's either completely made up and a colossal clickbait/trolling effort by the DT in which case fair play to them 🙂
the sooner we tax buy to let out of existence the better, would we allow any other necessity of life to be speculated upon by "investors"
Yes, investors speculate on everything from water and food to energy and pharmaceuticals - everything's for sale, it's just how we run the world. I'm not saying it's right and I'm not disagreeing with you on the principle of doing something about buy-to-let, but speculating on property isn't a special case in itself.
they're not saying this though, are they.
Yes. Thats exactly what they're saying.
They're saying they want to minimise their personal sacrifices without sacrificing what they want for their kids. And I'm sure you do just the same.
a) An expensive private education isn't a right (ask the 97% of the population who don't get one.)
b) It certainly isn't a right on top of your already extravagant lifestyle, without making any sacrifices.
Like I said... sense of entitlement
They're saying they want to minimise their personal sacrifices without sacrificing what they want for their kids. And I'm sure you do just the same.
As far as sacrifices go, it's analogous to buying a Hope headset instead of a Chris King.
I fail to see how they can buy a second house and rent it out, earn in the brackets they do, yet not manage their own finances. Tax returns alone must require a reasonable degree of acumen.
This, mostly.
You become a senior manager by progressing through more junior positions. I simply do not believe that they progressed in their careers without having to manage budgets.
At a combined income of 190k in those professions in London I'd say that neither of them were that senior. Both are probably fairly junior in fact.
I still don't get the ire - they have sought advice on how to maintain their current lifestyle and then fit in school fees. The answer is addressed in the article: earn more or spend less or create money by liquidating assets.
I don't get the anger bneing expressed other than people seeing a bigger income than their own and feeling overcome by a strong emotional response. Do you also run your keys down the side of expensive cars?
Be upset at social and financial inequality in general, yes, but don't come across as envious at an otherwise slightly naive family.
Their a consultant and solicitor I doubt they do, do much budget stuff at work.
They clearly do want to have their cake and eat and for they deserve a bit of abuse. Just sell the flat, and bingo most of their problems solved in one. Albeit if they don't rein in their finances then they'll burn through it pretty quickly.
I'd love to know how they burn their monthly budget, although I wonder if paying for fancy house re-decoration is eating into a lot of it.
They weren't complaining or asking for sympathy - just for financial advice, in the financial advice pages. This wasn't a Daily Hate middle-class whinge.
Newflash - there are people who earn more than all of us, and people of almost every income do have to take spending decisions. So I am not sure why the OP felt the need to post it.
I spend a bit of time in South West London now where my partner lives and am totally shocked at both the cost of property (725k does not buy you much at all) and the aspirational culture and educational arms race...
I'd love to see some heat taken out of the housing market, and a decent universal education system, and my kids have gone through the state system. It ain't going to happen.
Nothing to see here - move on...
I'm not sure it's 'entitlement', more 'expectation' binners.
They think 'we've got the house, the income, the cars like our freinds - they're sending their kids to private school so we should be able to but the numbers don't add up'.
If there's a social expectation you will be in a position to make certain 'lifestyle' choices you'll be surprised when they seem unachievable, despite an apparently healthy income.
Managing a budget at work and managing your own budget are different things.Being able to and actually doing it aren't the same.
If you always spend less than you earn there is no need to budget
Indeed. That sort of career path means you can go from a starter/grad position where you're barely getting by (at London prices), to one where you're running at a decent surplus within a few years. You stop checking your balance every few days to make sure your rent or bills will go out, because you always have enough left at the end of the month to cover it. You don't so much "budget" for things like holidays, just pick somewhere and there's probably enough to cover it without needing to specifically save for it.
You might sweep some money aside for things like a house deposit but I imagine these guys were from a time when 95+% mortgages were the norm and you just find somewhere you like, the mortgage is no more than rent was and you move in.
Then you have kids, suddenly lose an income and gain a load of extra expense and need to actually sit down and work out where all that money goes. Although I guess the couple in the article have probably been able to sleepwalk through that stage too, hence the advice essentially boiling down to "write a budget".
binners, is english your second language? 🙂
I can't see where you're reading any of that..
At a combined income of 190k in those professions in London I'd say that neither of them were that senior. Both are probably fairly junior in fact.
Sorry, no. They're very much in the upper bracket of incomes, even for London.
I still don't get the ire - they have sought advice on how to maintain their current lifestyle and then fit in school fees. The answer is addressed in the article: earn more or spend less or create money by liquidating assets.
Earn more or spend less? You're suggesting that this was a conclusion they couldn't reach for themselves?
I don't get the ire bneing expressed other than people seeing a bigger income than their own and feeling overcome by a strong emotional response. Do you also run your keys down the side of expensive cars?
Ah, the jealousy card. Pathetic.
Be upset at social and financial inequality in general, yes, but don't come across as envious at an otherwise slightly naive family.
I have a very comfortable lifestyle with no money worries. Why would I be envious?
the sooner we tax buy to let out of existence the better, would we allow any other necessity of life to be speculated upon by "investors"
In that eventuality, where will renters find a place to live?
Then you have kids, suddenly lose an income and gain a load of extra expense and need to actually sit down and work out where all that money goes.
Yes, that happened to us. Our solution was to spend less. Apart from bikes, obvs.
but speculating on property isn't a special case in itself.
apart from the supply side of the market being f***ed up & choices for opting out being fairly limited that is
Why would I be envious?
In which case why are you so angry at them?
Clickbait
In that eventuality, where will renters find a place to live?
BTL investors are not dong it for the good of the masses believe me, less buying demand would reduce costs allowing some people priced out of the market to buy & reduce rents for others
In which case why are you so angry at them?
I'm not angry. I just think they're pathetic.
They only have a few hundred pounds in cash savings
This is the shocking bit. I work in their world, a lot in London, and but thankfully getting back on the train to the reality of South Wales. I know lots of people who could be in that photo. I think they are basically seeing their peers and friends with their lifestyles and questioning why can't they also have that? It's because everyone is completely leveraged up to the hilt. If one of them lost their job, in quite a short space of time they could be way down their social ladder.
Give it 15 -20 years and they'll be burnt out with a massive mortgage to pay off and no pension.
They take home around £9300 per month, I'm struggling to see what they spend it all on after the expenses in the articale are accounted for.
I have friends in the same situation and I've not seen a bunch of more stressed out people in my life, they look broken and never really see their kids.
Having decided to step back from promotion at work and prioritise my family a few years ago I've never been happier. But anyhoo, if it all matters to them that much , I wish them luck (I bet they own s##t bikes).
£24k a year on school fees and properties over £1m.
Sell up and put your kids in state school... then get in the sea.
25k on school fees? i bet half of that is currently spent on various gym memberships, full sky tv subscriptions, lunchtime food and take-aways, wine club subscriptions, organic fruit/veg box that gets mostly binned and various other direct debits and outgoings.
anyone with half a brain could look at and see where to prune to make those savings without really having a huge impact on the quality of life.
For info, I was interested in terms of what they did.. In terms of their jobs, one is a "associate director" at a mid tier management consultancy and another is a "senior associate" at a Top 100 City law firm.
A comparable job to me and with a much smaller mortgage and my wife working part time, I wouldn't consider myself as anywhere near to affording to send my kids to private school.
I bet they own s##t bikes)
i bet they are betterer and nicerer than your s##t pleb bikes
I bet they own s##t bikes)i bet they are betterer and nicerer than your s##t pleb bikes
I feel so small right now.
anyone with half a brain could look at and see where to prune to make those savings without really having a huge impact on the quality of life.
You're suggesting they can cope without organic humous hand delivered from the local vegan commune? I think that's taking it a bit far.
They just need to give up Sky, Beer and fags and make the Giro last a bit longer....
[img] 
[/img]
Can you imagine the reply for the daily telegraph if some working class oik asked for advice on reigning their spending in as they were racking up debts on credit cards, spending more than they earned?
[i]The issue isn't the content of the article but the fact that the lower classes are reading a broadsheet newspaper [/i]
🙂
tbh In a past life we were earning that kinda of money AND affording private schooling for our son plus the usual 'costs' and had cash to spare - but we had neither a huge mortgage or a BTL. They just need to do a bit of budgeting, and I'd sell the BTL.
The bit that jumps out at me is earning 190k a year and spend just 5k of it on holidays! Admittedly me as a Singleton is in a different situation to a family of four, but I spend about as much on holidays/travelling as they do and earn approximately 10% of their joint income! ....living in Stoke helps with managing my budget though 🙂
They strike me as the type of people that know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
It doesn't say that they spend £5k on holidays.
Ah right, saw mention of 5k on holidays in the OP. My bad.
The £190K is likely to be total income - based on where they work my reckoning is that their salaries are probably around the £150K mark combined with the rest being bonuses that may or may not happen.
Looking at the size of their combined mortgages the couple are massively over leveraged so it's not surprising they are panicking - their options are:
- drop their private school aspirations
- downsize
- train the kids to be stars on x-factor and then retire early
- sell the children to a dubious Fagin like character and live the good life.
- take out life insurance and both do a Lord Lucan so that the kids can go to boarding school until they are 18
- move the family home to the midlands and both spend 4 hours a day on a train scuttling to and from London
- buy and read a copy of "personal finance" for dummies and make some common sense decisions that most people irrespective of income can take i.e. reduce regular outgoings to no more than 90% of net income.
It doesn't say that they spend £5k on holidays.
And if any of their friends found out they spent that little, they'd be ostracised instantly.
For info, I was interested in terms of what they did.. In terms of their jobs, one is a "associate director" at a mid tier management consultancy and another is a "senior associate" at a Top 100 City law firm.
I'm surprised a Lawyer has allowed their name and story to be published like this. They are very public facing, and no doubt people will be googling their name to check who is handling their case and going to be quite surprised when this article pops up explaining their bad financial decisions.
Looking at the size of their combined mortgages the couple are massively over leveraged so it's not surprising they are panicking
Not sure about that - the rent on the flat will be covering one mortgage I'd like to think. Possibly they've had the flat empty for a few months hence the panic.
The £8k on credit cards could be interest free cash advance to put in the savings account like everyone on STW thinks is a good idea (though looks like it never reached it and went on a new handbag possibly).
Some of those calculations for kids education look a bit flaky to me - including the £9k for university fees.
Clikcbait, much like those reports that raising children 'costs' £500k over their school days. Thats if you assume you'd have to move house, buy a big new car, etc. etc.
Basically like everyone says, do a budget, decide what is important to you. They have a lot more going for them than people on the breadline.
At a combined income of 190k in those professions in London I'd say that neither of them were that senior. Both are probably fairly junior in fact.
+1
One (or both) of them is on a relatively low wage for a "senior associate" or "associate director" position. Although the fact he has to mention that it is a "Top 100" firm would suggest that he was clutching at straws?
Neither here nor there though. Still surprised someone would actually be happy to have their photo in the Telegraph next to an article like that.
Still surprised someone would actually be happy to have their photo in the Telegraph next to an article like that.
They've put their pride to one side to help highlight a difficult problem that is often hidden yet affects a large number of middle class people - a total lack of common sense. Without their noble sacrifice we would be ignorant of their plight and that of many others. Please donate now to 'I haven't got a clue how the other half live, but need more cash now' PO Box .....
am i the only one who, when trying to imagine what our 2 wealthy subjects are spending all their money on, keeps coming back to visions of this handsome fellow?
[img] 
[/img]
"this year alone ... an astonishing 59,000 pounds on socks!"
anyway, £5k on holidays? - that'll barely cover one week in Tuscany.
Bit late to this but is the article a Jambanomics allegory for the country's economics?
Bit late to this but is the article a Jambanomics allegory for the country's economics?
I did think the bloke in the article must be an STWer.....
I did think the bloke in the article must be an STWer.....
I seriously just don't know where the money goes. its as if it just evaporates.
*unloads XTR kitted carbon Santa Cruz out the back of the pimped out T5*
when trying to imagine what our 2 wealthy subjects are spending all their money on,
They aren't really wealthy though, they don't have that much in the way of real hard cash or assets. Assuming they actually got the asking price on their flat then they'd have £137k in cash and another £215k tied up in their house.
Still with their wages and a bit of being sensible they could sort the problem quickly, which is a luxury most don't have.
They aren't really wealthy though
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.
Please donate now to 'I haven't got a clue how the other half live, but need more cash now' PO Box .....
I think I saw that very ad in Private Eye.
Dickyboy - Memberthe sooner we tax buy to let out of existence the better, would we allow any other necessity of life to be speculated upon by "investors"
Err, yes. Just about any commodity you can think of.
They aren't really wealthy though
I think I saw that very ad in Private Eye.
I always wonder if people donate to them....
I don't think they're wealthy - potentially wealthy of course if they don't mess things up.
I don't think they're wealthy
Assuming they actually got the asking price on their flat then they'd have £137k
Or as someone working full time, on minimum wage would refer to that figure.... 12 years wages
They could move to a large 3 bed house in Wythenshawe and live mortgage free 😀
Just because a minimum wage person is poor doesn't make these people wealthy - but we all have our own definitions. Wealthy for me is not having to work whilst living in a nice house/area.
Fair play. Being in the top 1% of earners in the UK, with a household income of 200k a year, doesn't make you wealthy at all.
My apologies
Meanwhile.... back on planet earth......
Not quite top 1%, but very hard to argue they're not wealthy:
[img] 
?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=6c5dfaf77e1efe7ce1950cd29a1ff291[/img]
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/may/21/british-household-1m-assets
[img] 
[/img]
That's correct binners. Wealthy people don't have to do anything as sordid as rely on earned income.
That's correct binners. Wealthy people don't have to do anything as sordid as rely on earned income.
True of only a tiny fraction of the wealthy.
Fair play. Being in the top 1% of earners in the UK doesn't make you wealthy at all.
That's right it doesn't, or at least isn't not a simple as that. It has been said many, many times having a high salary does not necessarily make you wealthy and having a low salary does not necessarily make you poor. There is more to wealth than salary and for anyone not hard of thinking this isn't a difficult concept to grasp.
My own salary is pretty high and I'm not is an poor a shape financially as these people, but were I to lose my job I'd likely loose my house and begin to struggle relatively quickly. It might be a few months rather than days but the point stands that I, like these people, still need to work in order to live.
Not quite top 1%, but very hard to argue they're not wealthy:
According to that first graph they are nowhere near 1%. Given the net worth of their two properties is around 360k and assuming no other assets that would put them about 60%
Fair play. Being in the top 1% of earners in the UK doesn't make you wealthy at all.
Wealth <> income. They could actually be splashing it all on coke and hookers.
Interestingly, people on the average wage (c£25k) earn more than 60% of the population.
There is more to wealth than salary
Other platitudes include "money can't buy you happiness" and are invariably trotted out by people who have money.
Other platitudes include "money can't buy you happiness" and are invariably trotted out by people who have money.
You've missed my point as I was referring to assets such as property, shares, artwork etc not anything like "family" or "happiness". My usual retort to the statement "money can't buy you happiness" is "yeah, but it makes the misery a whole lot easier to live with."
Not read the article but 190k soon goes.
190k gross
-95k (50% for tax and NI)
-30k (2 x school fees)
-30k (2.5k mortgage x 12)
= 35k net
That leaves just 35k to buy the other things that sort of money is usually spent on such as:
- s****y car
- pension contributions
- investments (ISAs, other property etc)
- new shoes for tarquin and fifi
- hummus
Not sure what my point is - maybe just that it's easy for that kind of money top be spent without being too* frivolous.
*ok, a big London house, private school and nice car could be seen as frivalous
-
According to that first graph they are nowhere near 1%.
1% of EARNERS? Not wealth.
I'd hazard a guess that a lot of the 1% net worth individuals have never had to do anything as unsavoury as actually earn any of their money
Its hard to work out from that graph but at a guess they'd be somewhere between 55-60% on that graph and that is tied up in 2 illiquid assets. So definitely not poor but not troubling the wealthy either.
with a household income of 200k a year, doesn't make you wealthy at all.
You can't tell how long the household has been taking in £190k, oppositely there are some pensioners working for low annual wages but with a lot of wealth in assets. Annual salary is a poor indicator of total wealth IMO.
I'd hazard a guess that a lot of the 1% net worth individuals have never had to do anything as unsavoury as actually earn any of their money
Probably and hence would be by definition the Upper Class, this lot however, clearly do need to work and are Middle Middle Class aspiring to be Upper Middle.
What salary do you need to be upper middle then? Is it much more than the pittance they're scraping by on?
Is [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8148899.stm ]this[/url] upper middle or upper?
a big London house
They have a £750,000 house in South West London, that is unlikely to be a big house. In the better areas you would be looking at a flat for that amount.
Being in the top fraction in one of the richest countries in the world isn't wealthy.
Apparently.
190k gross
-95k (50% for tax and NI)
-30k (2 x school fees)
-30k (2.5k mortgage x 12)
= 35k net
You're about 20k out on the tax and NI
So £55k in readies for hummus and pastel polo shirts.
You're about 20k out on the tax and NI
Plus rental income. Let's call it £65k.
The privations they must endure...
Plus rental income. Let's call it £65k.
The rental income covers the BTL interest and that's it but as has been said many times already they are not saying they aren't well off, they are asking for advice on how to afford school fees.
£750k is barely enough for a pokey 3-bed terrace in the nicer (and even less nice) bits of SW London. You can spend considerably more on something too small for a family.
I still don't understand why people have such an issue with a couple earning good money. They are not scroungers, they did not inherit it, they work and earn. It is like they are committing a crime.
Assuming no pension relief, if they each earned £95k they'd take home £10,400 between them each month...
Year Month Week
Gross Wage £95,000 £7,917 £1,827
Taxable Wage £84,400 £7,033 £1,623
Tax Paid £27,403 £2,284 £527
Tax Free Allowance £10,600 £883 £204
National Insurance £5,171 £431 £99
Take-home pay £62,426 £5,202 £1,200
Being in the top fraction in one of the richest countries in the world isn't wealthy.Apparently.
Well if you're going to use a global perspective there are very few people in the UK who aren't wealthy!
hey are asking for advice on how to afford school fees.
Don't spaff more than 55k a year would appear to be the answer.
The rental income covers the BTL interest and that's it but as has been said many times already they are not saying they aren't well off, they are asking for advice on how to afford school fees.
Advice as follows:
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.
Next!
edit, way too slow ➡
I still don't understand why people have such an issue with a couple earning good money.
People have an issue with them earning [s]good[/s] an exceptionally large amount of money, then complaining that they don't have enough of it.
Ay, ya gotta think of the children in all of this.. Must be embarrassed having Mater n Pater splashed all over t'interwebz proclaiming "fiffi and foofo can't go to blah di blah school"
Honestly.
You'd think if they needed advice on money worries they'd chuck £400 at an Independant Financial adviser or Accountant to help sort them out...
Tim nice but dim springs to mind.