# Moving to London - Is This Package Worth it?



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

I've got a 30k salary offer (don't even know how this compares to rest of uk) and my proposed place of employment has an SW1 post code. A ten minute walk from London Victoria.

At the moment I rent a 1 bed flat in worcestershire and would not be willing to flat share or any of that and certainly could not cope living in a really poor area.

Monday is the day I'll be giving my answer. So if you guys can help me make my mind up, that would be awesome.

Thanks


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2011)

Just because your job is in SW1 doesn't mean you have to live there. 

Brixton is only 10 minutes away on the tube to Victoria

I've lived on £15k but then I pay a low rent


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 15, 2011)

You're laughing and can live anywhere. Hth.

E2a: nasty lol @ 'poor area'


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Just because your job is in SW1 doesn't mean you have to live there.
> 
> Brixton is only 10 minutes away on the tube to Victoria
> 
> I've lived on £15k but then I pay a low rent



The SW1 was just to help people know where I'll be working. I don't have a clue about anything in London - at all.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> You're laughing and can live anywhere. Hth.


 
Hth? I Hope that's a good thing.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

Is maida vale ok?


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Is maida vale ok?


 
Hope That Helps. 

Maidan Vale is nice. Careful crossing the road though - one false step and you'll be in Brent!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> The SW1 was just to help people know where I'll be working. I don't have a clue about anything in London - at all.


 
Well now you know that Brixton is only 10 minutes on the tube 

Plenty of cheaper places around.  Look at a tube map and see what's near that doesn't involve too much changing.  Also look at what train lines go into Victoria Station or Waterloo or Charing Cross etc.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 15, 2011)

Don't bother Minnie. Brixton will terrify this small town provincial cunt.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

Ok. Which area has all the awesome clubs - the one's that allow glow sticks etc but not rough ?


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jan 15, 2011)

There are downsides to living in a really poor area. On the other hand your money goes further. That is provided you can stop it going further than where you want it to go. _"Hey stop thief!"_


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2011)

Vauxhall


----------



## wrysmile (Jan 15, 2011)

*watches thread*

Victoria is a major station, so you have a lot of choice for areas to live that will be an easy commute. With a £30k salary, you could manage a little nice flat. Rents are expensive in London though. Have a look on realestate.com or similar and look for properties for rent with a 3 mile radius. You'll soon see where you can afford.


----------



## girasol (Jan 15, 2011)

I'm pretty sure you need about £1k a month if you want to live alone, or something around that.  Plus transport costs, depending on where you live.

e2a, quick search for 1 bed flat in Camberwell (cheaper than Brixton) http://www.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/det...edium=feeds&utm_content=rent[13831188]&refer=


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> Don't bother Minnie. Brixton will terrify this small town provincial cunt.


 
To be fair, I was the only person with a smile on my face and not rushing at 100mph when I was in London. What you say is probably bang on the money. London isn't for this small-town, relaxed boy.

I think you just made me realise. I owe you one haha


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Jan 15, 2011)

30K is a good salary - like wry said if you are coming in to Victoria to work you can look further afield - though of course that will increase travel costs. Carshalton where I used to live is nice and a direct 25 minute train journey into Victoria. No clubs though. or glow sticks.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> To be fair, I was the only person with a smile on my face and not rushing at 100mph when I was in London. What you say is probably bang on the money. London isn't for this small-town, relaxed boy.
> 
> I think you just made me realise. I owe you one haha


 
Whatever. Just don't dither in my way


----------



## girasol (Jan 15, 2011)

don't know if my link worked, but that was a 1 bed flat in Camberwell for £800 pcm, with garden...

The property is situated on Camberwell Road which is only a 5 min bus journey to Elephant & Castle Stations. There is an excellent selection of shops, supermarkets, restaurants, pubs etc.

You will find cheaper, depends what you're after and what area.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> To be fair, I was the only person with a smile on my face and not rushing at 100mph when I was in London. What you say is probably bang on the money. London isn't for this small-town, relaxed boy.



Don't believe you for a second.  All the tourists dawdle.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

girasol said:


> don't know if my link worked, but that was a 1 bed flat in Camberwell for £800 pcm, with garden...
> 
> The property is situated on Camberwell Road which is only a 5 min bus journey to Elephant & Castle Stations. There is an excellent selection of shops, supermarkets, restaurants, pubs etc.


 
Yeah, that would be perfect to be honest.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2011)

girasol said:


> don't know if my link worked, but that was a 1 bed flat in Camberwell for £800 pcm, with garden...
> 
> The property is situated on Camberwell Road which is only a 5 min bus journey to Elephant & Castle Stations. There is an excellent selection of shops, supermarkets, restaurants, pubs etc.


 
I personally would avoid Camberwell.  It's a right pain in the arse with traffic


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Don't believe you for a second.  All the tourists dawdle.


 
Yeah, I did stand on the left side of the escalator. Until someone kindly asked me to move.

The best bit was within my first 30 seconds over ever being on the tube this guy and a woman were rowing about cramping each other up (at peak time - 8.30 ish). I just burst out laughing. haha


----------



## girasol (Jan 15, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I personally would avoid Camberwell.  It's a right pain in the arse with traffic


 
I'd go for Tooting, personally   But Camberwell is near central London and cheaper than Brixton.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 15, 2011)

I'd avoid South London tbh. OP - stay north where the tubes are.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Yeah, I did stand on the left side of the escalator. Until someone kindly asked me to move.
> 
> The best bit was within my first 30 seconds over every being on the tube this guy and a woman were rowing about cramping each other up (at peak time - 8.30 ish). I just burst out laughing. haha


 
Yeah but there is being cramped and being cramped so someone's hand is almost up your arse -  the former you manage, the latter you, generally, complain about. You see have to get used to such distinctions if you are going to cope on the tube!


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> I'd avoid South London tbh. OP - stay north where the tubes are.


 
You guys are confusing me now. I feel like your befriending me only to watch my life plunder into disaster.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Yeah but there is being cramped and being cramped so someone's hand is almost up your arse -  the former you manage, the latter you, generally, complain about. You see have to get used to such distinctions if you are going to cope on the tube!


 
The latter I'd pay for.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 15, 2011)

Here's some light reading for you to ease you in gently and stop annoying us locals 

http://victorian.fortunecity.com/finsbury/254/tuberules.html


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

girasol said:


> I'm pretty sure you need about £1k a month if you want to live alone, or something around that.  Plus transport costs, depending on where you live.


 
Basically, yeah. You won't be rich on 30k a year after bills, but you could certainly live on it.


----------



## girasol (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> You guys are confusing me now. I feel like your befriending me only to watch my life plunder into disaster.


 
Don't forget about West and East either 

Seriously, I suggest you pick a place in either zone 1 or 2 (if you are travelling by tube this will make a big difference on travel costs) - preferably something that means you don't have to do too many tube changes...  You can get a place further afar but travel costs will increase.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

btw, on 30k per year, you will live in an area with a mix of rich and poor. That's what most of London is.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 15, 2011)

£30k a year is well enough to live very comfortably on (ten k more than everyone reckoned you'd need on your last thread), but pretty much all of London has some 'poor areas' right alongside the rich ones, so you can't avoid them. Glowsticks are only used for sticking up the arses of patronising outsiders who walk so slowly that they're easy to catch; they're banned in clubs, sorry.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

We can end this thread now. You guys have beaten me up to the point where I've realised London is not for me. Totally and utterly a closed deal.

It sounds like I'd actually be taking a pay cut as well. I didn't think 30k would make me rich at all.

Thanks for the help. You really have just shaped my life 

That tube etiquette was the clincher.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 15, 2011)

scifisam said:


> £30k a year is well enough to live very comfortably on (ten k more than everyone reckoned you'd need on your last thread), but pretty much all of London has some 'poor areas' right alongside the rich ones, so you can't avoid them. Glowsticks are only used for sticking up the arses of patronising outsiders who walk so slowly that they're easy to catch; they're banned in clubs, sorry.


 
You can't ban glow sticks. Freehanding is an art form.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

You'd come to like it. 

The rent is a bugger. You'd be paying at least half your wages on rent/council tax/bills.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

scifisam said:


> £30k a year is well enough to live very comfortably on (ten k more than everyone reckoned you'd need on your last thread),.


 

I think you'd struggle to live in London on 20k in your own flat. You'd be living on about £100 a week tops. Not impossible, but not a lot of money if you're working full time.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You'd come to like it.
> 
> The rent is a bugger. You'd be paying at least half your wages on rent/council tax/bills.


 
Leaving you with around a grand a month for food and fun (after tax)? Oh, the humanity!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Eminently doable, clearly. But not _rich_.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Eminently doable, clearly. But not _rich_.


 
Nobody said it was 'rich.' 

£1000 per month after tax, rent, council tax and bills is a pretty decent wedge. There are plenty of people who are raising families on an income lower than that - income, not post-rent etc - and they're not skip diving and begging on the streets.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 15, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> At the moment I rent a 1 bed flat in worcestershire and would not be willing to flat share or any of that *and certainly could not cope living in a really poor area.*


 

Why the hell not? Every else on your wage seems to manage just fine!


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 16, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Why the hell not? Every else on your wage seems to manage just fine!


 
Because my current situation is better than that. Why reduce my current quality of life?


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Because my current situation is better than that. Why reduce my current quality of life?



Then don't! And the beers are on you next time you're down then.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> You can't ban glow sticks. Freehanding is an art form.


 
If I see you south of Birmingham I'm gonna shoot ya. hth, hand etc


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 16, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Because my current situation is better than that. Why reduce my current quality of life?


 
I think this is a misunderstanding of what London is like. You can get a v nice flat in a v nice block with a gym in the basement in an area with clubs and bars in a v 'scruffy and colourful' area. You could also get the same kind of flat in a posh area and have no action at all on your doorstep. 

Same advice to any out of towners moving to the big city - get 6 month contract somewhere convenient for work that you like the look of then see how you feel. See FakePlasticGirl pogofished thread.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 16, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> I'd avoid South London tbh. OP - stay north where the tubes are.


 
Very frequent trains to Victoria from Croydon that take 15 minutes. Cheaper houses in suburban streets. Tubes suck, especially at rush hour. North London sucks, I have been there.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 16, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Very frequent trains to Victoria from Croydon that take 15 minutes. Cheaper houses in suburban streets. Tubes suck, especially at rush hour. North London sucks, I have been there.


 
Lol. Croydon != London


----------



## Guineveretoo (Jan 16, 2011)

When I got a job in SW1, I did what others have suggested, and looked at public transport routes to my office, and then went as far in as I could afford.  I hate the tube, so I was looking at buses and overground trains.

I ended up in South Norwood, which has trains taking 11 minutes to London Bridge, but half an hour to Victoria, but it is also a short bus journey from East Croydon, which has fast and regular trains to both of those places and lots more, and has trains all night.


----------



## girasol (Jan 16, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> Lol. Croydon != London


 
London Borough of Croydon  

Actually, is Croydon in London or not?  one of those borderline cases?


----------



## Guineveretoo (Jan 16, 2011)

Croydon is in London.

It's really boring and pointless, the constant sniping about whether or not Croydon is in London.

Get over it, people, Croydon is a London borough.

But it is also irrelevant in this context, since the thread is about where to live in order to commute to work in SW1.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 16, 2011)

In name only. It's been discussed a million times.


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> Leaving you with around a grand a month for food and fun (after tax)? Oh, the humanity!


£30k is about £1600/month take home assuming a pension is being paid into. You'd have a lot less than a grand a month left after paying London rents and bills!


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 16, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> In name only. It's been discussed a million times.


Yeah and at no point has anyone found croydon to be outside London except in their own heads. 

Face facts, Croydon has been in London longer than you have. It's the greenest of all the London Bouroghs, has the largest population of 'Londoners'.  Most importantly, in regards to this thread, it's one 15 minute train journey from Victoria.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2011)

He didn't say he wanted to live in London.  He said he was considering working in London.

He could live in half of Surrey or Sussex and have a decent train into Victoria.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Jan 16, 2011)

You can rent a one bedroom flat in Croydon for less than £600. Here is one http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=747778 for example.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2011)

Even the train from Brighton to Victoria only takes 50 minutes.  And that's right on the coast!


----------



## keithy (Jan 16, 2011)

But you have to consider travel at night too, not just your commute.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Jan 16, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Even the train from Brighton to Victoria only takes 50 minutes.  And that's right on the coast!


 
Yeah, I looked at Brighton when I first started working in SW1. Unfortunately, it is really expensive, and the cost of travel on top meant it was impossibly so.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> £30k is about £1600/month take home assuming a pension is being paid into. You'd have a lot less than a grand a month left after paying London rents and bills!


 
Hmm, I wasn't considering a pension. You could very easily get a 1-bedroom flat for £800 in zone 2, and council tax and bills would be max £200 more, so that's still at least £600, which isn't bad at all. 

Some of you lot must think people like me live on nothing but baked beans, considering that my income is so much lower than incomes you consider low. 

Anyway, for Victoria I'd go south too - either that or Walthamstow.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2011)

> But you have to consider travel at night too, not just your commute.



Why?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2011)

You can hire a 1-bed flat right opposite Epsom station for about £800 per month.  4-6 trains an hour into London, Victoria about 30 mins.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2011)

Because many people like to have a bit of a social life that doesn't consist of nervously looking at the clock for the last train or facing a whopping taxi bill home?


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> Hmm, I wasn't considering a pension. You could very easily get a 1-bedroom flat for £800 in zone 2, and council tax and bills would be max £200 more, so that's still at least £600, which isn't bad at all.
> 
> Some of you lot must think people like me live on nothing but baked beans, considering that my income is so much lower than incomes you consider low.
> 
> Anyway, for Victoria I'd go south too - either that or Walthamstow.


 
I didn't say I considered it a low income. I was just disputing the idea that you'd have a grand a month left over after rent and bills on a flat in London. A grand a month left over to live on is pretty minted - £600 not so much.


----------



## girasol (Jan 16, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> In name only. It's been discussed a million times.


 
And of course your verdict is final and that's that.  what about Merton?


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 16, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Because many people like to have a bit of a social life that doesn't consist of nervously looking at the clock for the last train or facing a whopping taxi bill home?


 
Yeah, this. I can stand (?) cross-eyed at 4am in the middle of town and be home in 20 mins.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jan 16, 2011)

girasol said:


> And of course your verdict is final and that's that.  what about *Merton*?


 
Never heard of it.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> I didn't say I considered it a low income. I was just disputing the idea that you'd have a grand a month left over after rent and bills on a flat in London. A grand a month left over to live on is pretty minted - £600 not so much.


 
Ah, you were just correcting something without actually arguing, fair enough. 

I wouldn't say £600 is minted, but it's a decent wedge, and that's even after paying quite a lot of money for a pension.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> Never heard of it.


 
Merton? It's got Wimbledon, which is stultifyingly, deliberately _nice_ in the village part and has a rowdyish town centre with the charm of a lesser Sutton. And there are luminous other areas, like Merton, Colliers Woods and Mitcham. Some nice green parts spread about, but ugly traffic and horrible transport in the main.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 16, 2011)

I reckon Fiended has given up on the idea


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 16, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Because many people like to have a bit of a social life that doesn't consist of nervously looking at the clock for the last train or facing a whopping taxi bill home?


 
Last trains are pretty much later than the last tubes. They also start again an hour after they stop.  Still it's better to be in Clapham Junction or Croydon because all the trains on that route go there.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 16, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Last trains are pretty much later than the last tubes. They also start again an hour after they stop.  Still it's better to be in Clapham Junction or Croydon because all the trains on that route go there.


 

Do they get stuck when it snows though?


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 16, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Ok. Which area has all the awesome clubs - the one's that allow glow sticks etc but not rough ?


 


Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Vauxhall



Exactly. If I was moving to London now I'd be hunting some where vauxhall oval kennington. 
Good transport, tube, trains and buses.

And its has Boris bike stations so you could cycle to SW1 in 10/15 minutes.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 16, 2011)

5t3IIa said:


> Yeah, this. I can stand (?) cross-eyed at 4am in the middle of town and be home in 20 mins.


 
So can I to Croydon. . . .  well as long as I am standing near charing cross, victoria, waterloo, or London bridge.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Jan 16, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Merton? It's got Wimbledon, which is stultifyingly, deliberately _nice_ in the village part and has a rowdyish town centre with the charm of a lesser Sutton. And there are luminous other areas, like Merton, Colliers Woods and Mitcham. Some nice green parts spread about, but ugly traffic and horrible transport in the main.


 
Transport from Wimbledon is excellent tbf - you've got both the District Line and the overground to Wateloo which stops at Vauxhall allowing you to change to the Victoria Line. Also the Northern Line at South Wimbledon is a short walk away. Plus bus servives to Putney, Kingston, Sutton, Morden - should you ever choose to go there - and others.  Great transport links. Though the traffic can be a nightmare.

I lived in Wimbledon for a number of years and loved it - apart from the tennis!


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 16, 2011)

If your young free and single stay as near the centre as possible. You have a enough money in that offer. You will have more fun. Check that there is at least one direct night bus from centre of town to where ever you are considering. In London cutting down travelling time is the route to having a better life. Also the more routes to where you live the less stress when it all goes tits up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> Ah, you were just correcting something without actually arguing, fair enough.
> 
> I wouldn't say £600 is minted, but it's a decent wedge, and that's even after paying quite a lot of money for a pension.


 
I don't agree that that's a decent wage. It's the kind of wage that will have you cooking your lunch the night before because you can't afford to buy it from work. It's the kind of wage that will have you checking your finances before going down the pub. And you'll probably be dipping into your overdraft to go on holiday. 

It's not poverty. But if you're working full time in a job that may well involve a deal of responsibility and stress, it's really not much.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 16, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Ok. Which area has all the awesome clubs - the one's that allow glow sticks etc but not rough ?


 
lots of great clubs in poor areas


HTH


----------



## girasol (Jan 16, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Merton? It's got Wimbledon, which is stultifyingly, deliberately _nice_ in the village part and has a rowdyish town centre with the charm of a lesser Sutton. And there are luminous other areas, like Merton, Colliers Woods and Mitcham. Some nice green parts spread about, but ugly traffic and horrible transport in the main.


 
But is Merton a London Borough or not?  That is the question...





5t3IIa said:


> Never heard of it.


 
I hadn't heard of it either until I moved to a neighbouring borough.  It has one of the ugliest buildings I've ever seen, ever!  Thankfully I don't have to look at it very often.

There it is: http://www.southlondonpress.co.uk/news.cfm?id=34546

It looks much worse 'in person'!


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't agree that that's a decent wage. It's the kind of wage that will have you cooking your lunch the night before because you can't afford to buy it from work. It's the kind of wage that will have you checking your finances before going down the pub. And you'll probably be dipping into your overdraft to go on holiday.
> 
> It's not poverty. But if you're working full time in a job that may well involve a deal of responsibility and stress, it's really not much.


 
You wouldn't be able to afford to buy a sandwich at lunch with £600 a month for food and fun? Tesco meal deals are £2 and lots of other places do similar offers. That'd be a whole forty quid a month on bought lunches - maybe fifty or sixty if you go for something a little more expensive and never take a day of work. That leaves you with around £550 for evening meals, breakfast and transport and fun; £800 is a zone 1 or 2 rent, so your transport costs shouldn't be too high.

How do you think people on lower incomes survive? Genuine question, not rhetorical. If someone on £30k has to make their own lunch and sometimes can't afford the pub, how do the many Londoners on minimum wage or the dole survive? There are plenty of them and they do manage.


----------



## trashpony (Jan 16, 2011)

He's not coming now - you lot scared him off


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> You wouldn't be able to afford to buy a sandwich at lunch with £600 a month for food and fun? Tesco meal deals are £2 and lots of other places do similar offers. That'd be a whole forty quid a month on bought lunches - maybe fifty or sixty if you go for something a little more expensive and never take a day of work. That leaves you with around £550 for evening meals, breakfast and transport and fun; £800 is a zone 1 or 2 rent, so your transport costs shouldn't be too high.
> 
> How do you think people on lower incomes survive? Genuine question, not rhetorical. If someone on £30k has to make their own lunch and sometimes can't afford the pub, how do the many Londoners on minimum wage or the dole survive? There are plenty of them and they do manage.


 
It's after rent + bills, not everything. The £600 is for transport and clothing as well as food and fun. And what do you mean by transport costs not being 'high'? Not high relative to commuting from further away, or not high compared to £600/month? What proportion of that £600 would a monthly travel card be?

They manage by living with family or in bedsits and/or claiming housing benefit and/or working tax credits, how do you think?


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't agree that that's a decent wage. .


 
It's fine. Before I was made redundant our family income was about £70,000 or so, now we live on just over 20 for a family of 3 I think. We have probably made a few adjustments but I don't really have to check if I can afford the pub or not.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

I've lived in London on the dole. I claimed benefits, I shopped at Netto, I made do with the clothes I had, I didn't buy records or books – if I wanted a book, I went to the library. I drank at cheap pubs when I went out drinking. I worked cash in hand when the occasion arose... 

The usual. 

But if you're working full time, you really don't want to have to do those kinds of things.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> It's after rent + bills, not everything. The £600 is for transport and clothing as well as food and fun. And what do you mean by transport costs not being 'high'? Not high relative to commuting from further away, or not high compared to £600/month? What proportion of that £600 would a monthly travel card be?
> 
> They manage by living with family or in bedsits and/or claiming housing benefit and/or working tax credits, how do you think?


 
I count most clothing as 'fun' and I already mentioned transport. 

If you want to get a travelcard, which not everyone needs, that'd be £100 per month. 

Even after tax credits and housing benefit, the income of someone on minimum wage is nowhere near £30k. None of the many very low income people I know lives with their family unless they have some other reason to live there. I mean, some months £600 is my entire income and I have to pay for everything except council tax out of that and I'm a parent; I honestly don't understand the mentality that says that's not a decent wage when you haven't even got to pay rent out of it. 

If £30k is not a decent wedge, then it must be a fairly low income or average at best. What does that make £20k? £12k? £6k? It's setting the bar for 'low income' far too high.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> If £30k is not a decent wedge, then it must be a fairly low income or average at best. What does that make £20k? £12k? £6k? It's setting the bar for 'low income' far too high.


 
No it's not. It's recognising the insane private rentals market in London. If you want a comfortable disposable income on £30k, you need to live in a shared house or be fortunate enough to have a place is social housing. You can, just, get by on that income in your own private-rental flat. Much less than that, and you simply couldn't. I would say, for instance, that £20k is not enough to survive in your own flat. If you 'only' earn £20k, you should not even be considering it. 

That doesn't mean you're poor. It just means that you are not rich enough to rent a private flat to yourself in London.

BTW, depending on your work environment, if you're working full time, new clothes are not 'fun'. They are essential.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But if you're working full time, you really don't want to have to do those kinds of things.


 
Sorry, I think the point I was making was that being single on 30k you don't have to do those things at all. Maybe I just don't buy all that much but the only real difference not having as much money as I had before is that I don't keep racking up huge savings in the bank.


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> I count most clothing as 'fun' and I already mentioned transport.
> 
> If you want to get a travelcard, which not everyone needs, that'd be £100 per month.
> 
> ...



I count clothing as a necessity! But then I don't do dressing up.

Once more, I have not claimed that £30k is a low income. It just doesn't go that far if you live in London or commutersville. It is below average. The median income in London is around £34k and the mean around £43k, so below average by either measure.

If rent and bills came to £1k/month (your estimate), how could you pay for that on a net income of £600?

The Rowntree Foundation estimate of a minimum reasonable living wage is £13,900 for a single person (£959.60/month after tax) - but that's nationwide, not weighted for London. My mortgage and bills in Brum were £450/month for a two bed terrace, which is a massive difference from a grand a month for a one bed flat. The difference in living costs pretty much is the difference between earning £14k and £30k.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> The median income in London is around £34k and the mean around £43k, so below average by either measure..


 
And these figures are crucial, because it is this that determines the level of private rents. If you're earning below-median wage and you're wanting to do something that most people on your wage don't do – rent your own private-sector flat – you're not going to have much money left over.


----------



## vauxhallmum (Jan 16, 2011)

*dreams of 30K per year*

Think of the glowsticks I could purchase


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And these figures are crucial, because it is this that determines the level of private rents. If you're earning below-median wage and you're wanting to do something that most people on your wage don't do – rent your own private-sector flat – you're not going to have much money left over.


 
Exactly. 

You guys helped me realise that this package is not worth it in terms of what I want from life  and I am best off  where I am. 

I really am massively grateful.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 16, 2011)

vauxhallmum said:


> *dreams of 30K per year*
> 
> Think of the glowsticks I could purchase


 
I have many. For milfy-mums I don't mind sharing either


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Exactly.
> 
> You guys helped me realise that this package is not worth it in terms of what I want from life  and I am best of where I am.
> 
> I really am massively grateful.


That's the thing. £30k is a perfectly decent income for London, but it'll only go about as far as £18k elsewhere. So the benefits of London have to be worth it for you - unless your earning power elsewhere is even lower, of course.


----------



## vauxhallmum (Jan 16, 2011)

I read that as milky-mum


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 16, 2011)

vauxhallmum said:


> I read that as milky-mum


 
Play your cards right....


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

Ewwwww.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it's not. It's recognising the insane private rentals market in London. If you want a comfortable disposable income on £30k, you need to live in a shared house or be fortunate enough to have a place is social housing. You can, just, get by on that income in your own private-rental flat. Much less than that, and you simply couldn't. I would say, for instance, that £20k is not enough to survive in your own flat. If you 'only' earn £20k, you should not even be considering it.
> 
> That doesn't mean you're poor. It just means that you are not rich enough to rent a private flat to yourself in London.



OK. We'll have to agree to disagree. You think that you can't rent a flat on less than £30k, and I think that your own figures leave you with more disposable income than many people have to supply their every need, which means that you do not have an income anywhere near low.



> BTW, depending on your work environment, if you're working full time, new clothes are not 'fun'. They are essential.


 
I said 'most.' I kinda expected both you and ymu to bother reading my post rather than decided to make a point regardless. 



ymu said:


> I count clothing as a necessity! But then I don't do dressing up.
> 
> Once more, I have not claimed that £30k is a low income. It just doesn't go that far if you live in London or commutersville. It is below average. The median income in London is around £34k and the mean around £43k, so below average by either measure.
> 
> ...


 
I never said people could pay for an £800 flat on less than £800.  There are plenty of flats for less than £800 - that was the amount we were working on because you can get a nice flat almost in London anywhere for that, but it's not the minimum. 

Do you think 'below average' doesn't mean 'fairly low,' then? Not that those statistics are reliable, IMO - lots of low-waged jobs are the kind that won't turn up in those sorts of statistics. 

Oh, this is just annoying me now. I don't know why, but whenever this subject comes up, I get annoyed - if someone earning four times what I do is not earning enough, then I must be a fucking pauper. It's kinda like going to a cancer patient's bedside and saying you know how they feel because you have a touch of the sniffles.


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

Those statistics are pretty reliable - they're from ASHE. They won't include the grey economy, of course.

And, once again, the point isn't that £30k is a low income - it clearly isn't - the point is that it isn't worth as much in London as it is elsewhere. The OP wanted to know if the offer was good enough for him to take the job, given his current circumstances outside London - and the conclusions is no, no it isn't.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam,

Judge your life by how happy you are. Someone will always have more than you. And most people have more than me. I am very happy though, so don't care what other people earn.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> There are plenty of flats for less than £800


 
Where?

You're wrong, btw, to say that you can get a nice flat almost anywhere in London for that. There are lots of parts of London where you'd struggle to get a crap flat for £800.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> Those statistics are pretty reliable - they're from ASHE. They won't include the grey economy, of course.
> 
> And, once again, the point isn't that £30k is a low income - it clearly isn't - the point is that it isn't worth as much in London as it is elsewhere. The OP wanted to know if the offer was good enough for him to take the job, given his current circumstances outside London - and the conclusions is no, no it isn't.



But you're also saying that £30k is below average, and that does equal 'low.' I mean, how can it not? 



Fiended*** said:


> scifisam,
> 
> Judge your life by how happy you are. Someone will always have more than you. And most people have more than me. I am very happy though, so don't care what other people earn.


 
Oh, don't worry about that, I'm fine with my life. Don't know why this topic annoys me. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> Where?


 
Really? You're really disputing that there are flats for less than £800? OK, I give up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

Here's an example: Kennington/Oval area. Zone 1/2, nice and convenient for the OP's workplace. Not a cheap area, but not exactly posh by any means. The cheapest on this list is £200 per week, about £850 per month. 

So you won't get a nice one-bed flat in Kennington for less than £800. 

I think you underestimate how bloody expensive it is when you first arrive in London. Often when people have been there a few years, they end up with a better deal, but if you move there without any contacts, these are the prices you have to pay.


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> But you're also saying that £30k is below average, and that does equal 'low.' I mean, how can it not?


Below average does not equate to low! Approximately 20% of the population are living in poverty - way, way below the average (mean or median) income. The poverty line is set at 60% of the median, which is around £20k in London (0.6*£34k). That is a low income. £30k is not a low income, but it is still a below average income for London.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 16, 2011)

The income stuff misses the point a bit for me anyway. London offers a lot that you don't get anywhere else - there's just far more going on due to the sheer size of the place. It's also a pain in the arse in a lot of ways that smaller places aren't (or aren't so much at least). So for me whether it's a good idea to move or not depends on what you want to spend your time doing? If you're attracted to what London offers then move even if you have a little less disposable income IMO. Otherwise stay put. 

Although moving to some town outside London and commuting in strikes me as the worst of both worlds.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> Below average does not equate to low! Approximately 20% of the population are living in poverty - way, way below the average (mean or median) income. The poverty line is set at 60% of the median, which is around £20k in London (0.6*£34k). That is a low income. £30k is not a low income, but it is still a below average income for London.


 
Is the median income in London seriously 34k? Maybe median full-time wage is something like that. 

I've lived on 20k in London and it definitely wasn't a poverty wage.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

On your link, the cheapest one is £175, not £200. It would take more effort to find somewhere for £600/£650 or so, but they do exist, and quite a few urbanites live in such places.

@YMU: I'm not sure how you can say that below average doesn't = low. That's what below average means.  Something doesn't have to be the lowest possible to be low, it just has to be below average.


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Is the median income in London seriously 34k? Maybe median full-time wage is something like that.
> 
> I've lived on 20k in London and it definitely wasn't a poverty wage.


 
Yeah - the 60% of median calculation will give you a slightly distorted measure when applied to different geographical areas within the same country. This is because housing costs correlate strongly with wages, but most other living costs don't. The living wage in London is currently set at £7.60, I think, which is about £15k. Nationally, the poverty level is around £13k (national median is around £22k).


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> On your link, the cheapest one is £175, not £200. It would take more effort to find somewhere for £600/£650 or so, but they do exist, and quite a few urbanites live in such places.
> 
> @YMU: I'm not sure how you can say that below average doesn't = low. That's what below average means.  Something doesn't have to be the lowest possible to be low, it just has to be below average.


No, Below average means below average. If you're using the median to calculate the average, then it just means you're in the lower earning half of the population. By definition, 50% of us are below average earners. If you're using the mean, it just means that you earn less than you would if everyone earned the same. Because of income inequality, around 65% of us are below average earners, using this measure of 'average'. Neither of those things equate to being low, just low_er_ than some measure of the central value for a given population.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> On your link, the cheapest one is £175, not £200. It would take more effort to find somewhere for £600/£650 or so, but they do exist, and quite a few urbanites live in such places.


 
£150 per week. I'm sure they do exist, but not on Gumtree, it would appear. Where else should one look? 

Setting the sights a bit lower than Kennington –*Peckham: nice and easy journey by bus to Victoria for work...

This is the kind of area the OP would need to be looking in, not Kennington. 
Just about doable – there's one place in the price range.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> No, Below average means below average. If you're using the median to calculate the average, then it just means you're in the lower earning half of the population. If you're using the mean, it just means that you earn less than you would if everyone earned the same. Neither of those things equate to being low, just low_er_ than some measure of the central value for a given population.


 
The only time below average doesn't mean low is when you're talking to a child who's just got a bad grade and you're trying to be kind. 

It's very odd having to argue on a matter of fact such as this.


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

50% of all doctors are below average! Oh noes!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

There is such a thing as objective poverty – not being able to cover the essentials: food, shelter, clothing, heating. 

My per-annum income may be much closer to that of someone on the dole than a millionaire, but both the millionaire and I will share certain things that we don't share with the person on the dole, such as not having to worry about the cost of putting the heating on.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> £150 per week. I'm sure they do exist, but not on Gumtree, it would appear. Where else should one look?
> 
> Setting the sights a bit lower than Kennington –*Peckham: nice and easy journey by bus to Victoria for work...
> 
> ...


 
Yes, like I said, you'd have to look a bit harder. And I said that £800 would get you a flat almost anywhere in London, meaning that £600 is more limited - but it's still doable and the places aren't exactly terrible. And now you're arguing with me by posting a link that backs me up...

This has become a very odd thread.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

ymu said:


> 50% of all doctors are below average! Oh noes!


 
Well, yes.  Are you saying they're not?


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2011)

Actually, this is one of the most stupid, pointless arguments I've had for a long time. It's so bad, I'd rather go and do the ironing. Enjoy your Sunday, you insane people!


----------



## ymu (Jan 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> Well, yes.  Are you saying they're not?


 
No. By definition, they are. But that doesn't mean they're all bad doctors. We could have the best doctors in the world, all of them dedicated geniuses who never got anything wrong, and 50% of them would be below average. That's because "below average" does not mean "low".


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Because many people like to have a bit of a social life that doesn't consist of nervously looking at the clock for the last train or facing a whopping taxi bill home?


 


5t3IIa said:


> Yeah, this. I can stand (?) cross-eyed at 4am in the middle of town and be home in 20 mins.


 
So I can I.  I can be home in five minutes, in fact.

Going out doesn't consist of going out in London or nothing, you know.  I can probably count on the fingers and toes of four limbs the time I've arranged with friends to go out in London in the past 20 years.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 16, 2011)

kabbes said:


> So I can I.  I can be home in five minutes, in fact.
> 
> Going out doesn't consist of going out in London or nothing, you know.  I can probably count on the fingers and toes of four limbs the time I've arranged with friends to go out in London in the past 20 years.


 
Yeah but if you're going to uproot yourself and move to London you're unlikely to do it because you want to go to a local pub in a small commuter town whenever you go out. If that's what you want of a social live you might as well stay where you already know people.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 16, 2011)

Living in a euphemistically-termed "suburb" and going into London to work is not "living in London". You might as well live in Essex and take the train in. Lots of people do, plenty of regular trains to Liverpool Street.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2011)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Yeah but if you're going to uproot yourself and move to London you're unlikely to do it because you want to go to a local pub in a small commuter town whenever you go out. If that's what you want of a social live you might as well stay where you already know people.


 
Once again -- he didn't say he wanted to live in London.  He said he had a job that interested him in London and wanted to know whether the pay was enough to justify the costs he'll endure.

For example, I chose a job in London because it was a job I wanted.  I really, really didn't want to LIVE in London, though.  I can't stand the place.  But the job is wherever the job is.

And there is more to "not living in London" than just going to a pub, you know.  That's the kind of attitude that really gets people's backs up about Londoners.


----------



## fogbat (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> £150 per week. I'm sure they do exist, but not on Gumtree, it would appear. Where else should one look?
> 
> Setting the sights a bit lower than Kennington –*Peckham: nice and easy journey by bus to Victoria for work...
> 
> ...


 
That one's bloody excellent, actually. Especially considering bills are inclusive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

fogbat said:


> That one's bloody excellent, actually. Especially considering bills are inclusive.


 
Yes. Almost suspiciously bloody excellent, but it sounds good in fact. I wonder if there's a catch?

To be fair to sam, I did find a place that kind of proved her point somewhat. I suspect there may be too many poor people in Peckham for the OP's tastes, mind you.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes. Almost suspiciously bloody excellent, but it sounds good in fact. I wonder if there's a catch?


 
It's likely imaginary, and meant to make you call an agency who then say "oh sorry it's just gone this instant but hey we have these other ones and why don't we take your details". Like quite a lot of supposed flats for rent in London.


----------



## fogbat (Jan 16, 2011)

That, or one of those ones where you have to stick a couple of grand in Western Union, because they've been let down before and want to know you're serious.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

It's about 200 per month less than most flats like that in Peckham.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 16, 2011)

I did a bit of googling for the phone number and it's Fastlet Properties, a Brixton/SW letting agent. I'm sure they'd not do anything deceptive. That would be inconceivable.


----------



## grit (Jan 17, 2011)

I've never bothered viewing a property that didnt have interior photos posted beforehand.


----------



## girasol (Jan 17, 2011)

don't just look in gumtree for flats, try findaproperty.com...

http://www.findaproperty.com/

Rent prices have gone down a little though, http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=4379411

£190pw for studio in Pimlico...

1 Bed flat in SE1 for £750pcm... http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7925317

scroll to the bottom for more flats.  Of course this now is purely academic...


----------



## Cowley (Jan 17, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> I've got a 30k salary offer (don't even know how this compares to rest of uk) and my proposed place of employment has an SW1 post code. A ten minute walk from London Victoria.
> 
> At the moment I rent a 1 bed flat in worcestershire and would not be willing to flat share or any of that and certainly could not cope living in a really poor area.
> 
> ...



Sounds like the Suburbs would be perfect for you, somewhere like Redhill, it's on the main line to Victoria, I think it takes around half an hour to get into Victoria, maybe less on a quick train. My brother lives there so I vaguely know the area, it's OK, standard Suburb really.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Kennington £210pw - new build flats

I've a feeling this may be the old Bingo hall complex or the other flats that were built there

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7881815


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

New block

£725 per month, Brixton Hill

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7680244


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Newly refurbed

Brixton £200pw

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7095624


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Vauxhall - £220 pw and I'm guessing that's Zone 1 so reduced transport costs

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7822399


----------



## sim667 (Jan 17, 2011)

Cowley said:


> Sounds like the Suburbs would be perfect for you, somewhere like Redhill, it's on the main line to Victoria, I think it takes around half an hour to get into Victoria, maybe less on a quick train. My brother lives there so I vaguely know the area, it's OK, standard Suburb really.


 
I live in redhill, its 48 mins on the train to victoria, about the same to london bridge (commuter trains, not the stopping trains). Bout the same amount of time to brighton.

I saw you mention about clubs that allow glowsticks etc..... you wont find those in readhill, but im a raver, and I manage to get to a couple a month.

You could get a very nice 1 bedroom flat in reigate (the posh town that is connected to redhill, redhill is the budget town) for about £500 -£600pm which'd be a 5 min walk from town centre and 1 or 2 min walk from the station....

Commuting costs to london used to cost me £200 a month.

Otherwise you could look at croydon, which is only 25 mins on train.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Brixton Hill, new refurb - £207 per week 

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=5445366


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

£210 per week.  I'm guessing this is Courtenay House (Brixton Hill/New Park Road)

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7587267


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Jan 17, 2011)

The flats Minnie TM is posting up are around 2.5 times the price you'd expect to pay in Derby or Nottingham. Interestingly house shares, which the OP has ruled out, are 'only' around 1.25 to 1.5 times as dear in London as the Northern Midlands.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Oswaldtwistle said:


> The flats Minnie TM is posting up are around 2.5 times the price you'd expect to pay in Derby or Nottingham. Interestingly house shares, which the OP has ruled out, are 'only' around 1.25 to 1.5 times as dear in London as the Northern Midlands.



But they're within his budget and I think it gives him an idea what type of property he can get for the money he's willing to spend


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Jan 17, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> But they're within his budget and I think it gives him an idea what type of property he can get for the money he's willing to spend


 
I thought the OP had already decided to turn the job down? (post#89)

Anyway it was just a throw away observation.....


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Oswaldtwistle said:


> I thought the OP had already decided to turn the job down? (post#89)
> 
> Anyway it was just a throw away observation.....


 

I reckon he's a fickle type and will probably change his mind half a dozen times before deciding


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Jan 17, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I reckon he's a fickle type and will probably change his mind half a dozen times before deciding


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 17, 2011)

Well I can't help if the carrot being dangled contains greater nourishment can I - "mate"


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 17, 2011)

sim667 said:


> I live in redhill, its 48 mins on the train to victoria, about the same to london bridge (commuter trains, not the stopping trains). Bout the same amount of time to brighton.
> 
> I saw you mention about clubs that allow glowsticks etc..... you wont find those in readhill, but im a raver, and I manage to get to a couple a month.
> 
> ...


 
Forgot to mention I'm doing an open uni degree - so can't afford more than 30 mins commuting.

I don't even go raving that often. In fact I didn't got at all last year. I love to freehand (dance with glowsticks) so it would be an awesome bonus if there were local clubs that were glowstick-friendly.

Alas, it really was not meant to be. I feel like an attention-seeking ponce and wish I could blow this thread up.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Forgot to mention I'm doing an open uni degree - so can't afford more than 30 mins commuting.
> 
> I don't even go raving that often. In fact I didn't got at all last year. I love to freehand (dance with glowsticks) so it would be an awesome bonus if there were local clubs that were glowstick-friendly.
> 
> Alas, it really was not meant to be. I feel like an attention-seeking ponce and wish I could blow this thread up.


 
ah, you know you want to move to London.  Just do it.  If you don't like it, you can always piss off back to wherever you come from


----------



## Xanadu (Jan 17, 2011)

Haven't you seen the latest update on BBC News???  London's full.  They're starting a "One in, one out" policy.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 17, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> ah, you know you want to move to London.  Just do it.  If you don't like it, you can always piss off back to wherever you come from


 
Yeah, I really do if I can find the perfect mix of home life, work, commute, gym, study and clubbing. And I can't. Now this totally is it. Unless I get an insane offer when I tell them the deals off - it really is off.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 17, 2011)

Xanadu said:


> Haven't you seen the latest update on BBC News???  London's full.  They're starting a "One in, one out" policy.


 
He can wait until the next time you go jet-setting off round the world then sneak in and squat in your spot.


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 17, 2011)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> He can wait until the next time you go jet-setting off round the world then sneak in and squat in your spot.


 
LOL. London can kiss my sweaty aaaaaassssssss. Disaster averted.


----------



## fogbat (Jan 17, 2011)

London breathes a sigh of relief.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> LOL. London can kiss my sweaty aaaaaassssssss. Disaster averted.


 
You're really not endearing yourself to Londoners you know


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 17, 2011)

fogbat said:


> London breathes a sigh of relief.




Home Counties are exhaling audibly too.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jan 17, 2011)

You could get a really nice flat in a swish development in Kennington, good tube(northern line) and bus(20 minutes bus ride into centre of london) max), two other tube lines within easy distance... But there are poor people and in London you'll find them almost unavoidable because we live amongst each other. That's how it is.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 17, 2011)

Which is why I upped sticks and moved out to Surrey. Where there are no poor people. Apart from the people with no money.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Yeah, I really do if I can find the perfect mix of home life, work, commute, gym, study and clubbing. And I can't. Now this totally is it. Unless I get an insane offer when I tell them the deals off - it really is off.


 


ShiftyBagLady said:


> You could get a really nice flat in a swish development in Kennington, good tube(northern line) and bus(20 minutes bus ride into centre of london) max), two other tube lines within easy distance... But there are poor people and in London you'll find them almost unavoidable because we live amongst each other. That's how it is.



I listed a nice flat (one of the new builds) in Kennington earlier.  There's gyms in Victoria.  There's some decent pubs in Kennington.  I don't know myself about clubbing, but he'd be less than 15 minutes from Brixton and easily less than 1/2 half from the West End by bus.  If I didn't live in Brixton, I'd go for somewhere like Kennington as it's easy enough to walk to Victoria if there's strikes, it's in Zone 1, thereby reducing travel costs, it's got Brixton nearby and Victoria/Westminster/West End only a short distance.  Oh, and the IWM is only up the road


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jan 17, 2011)

The development I was thinking of is in a _beautiful_ old building, I'd love to live there. Has on site gym and everything...
If I were going to move to London for a short time then I'd live there or near Ebury Bridge if I wanted something busier and more central.


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Jan 17, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Alas, it really was not meant to be. I feel like an attention-seeking ponce and wish I could blow this thread up.


 
I've seen a lot worse Heck I've done a lot worse 




Fiended*** said:


> Yeah, I really do if I can find the perfect mix of home life, work, commute, gym, study and clubbing. And I can't. Now this totally is it. Unless I get an insane offer when I tell them the deals off - it really is off.


 
S'up to you, but you can spend a lot of your life waiting for things to be perfect, then you reach middle age as I'm doing now and find you've done nowt because you were waiting for the 'perfect' chance......


There's a hell of a lot of people sat there wishing they were sat on a 30k job offer in London......


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jan 17, 2011)

Oswaldtwistle said:


> S'up to you, but you can spend a lot of your life waiting for things to be perfect, then you reach middle age as I'm doing now and find you've done nowt because you were waiting for the 'perfect' chance......


And how boring, London is an exciting place to live, trying out new cities is exciting, throwing yourself into things is exciting


----------



## Fiended*** (Jan 17, 2011)

You guys have been great. If I didn't have so many requirements and constraints then I'd have gone for it. I've told them no and that's final.

Thanks for all the help and now I am leaving this thread for good. So all the nice things you say about me will go unnoticed.

Ciao


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Jan 17, 2011)

What was the job doing, if you don't mind me asking?

Good luck with whatever you decide to do instead


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

Fiended*** said:


> Yeah, I really do if I can find the perfect mix of home life, work, commute, gym, study and clubbing. And I can't. Now this totally is it. Unless I get an insane offer when I tell them the deals off - it really is off.


 


ShiftyBagLady said:


> You could get a really nice flat in a swish development in Kennington, good tube(northern line) and bus(20 minutes bus ride into centre of london) max), two other tube lines within easy distance... But there are poor people and in London you'll find them almost unavoidable because we live amongst each other. That's how it is.


 


Fiended*** said:


> You guys have been great. If I didn't have so many requirements and constraints then I'd have gone for it. I've told them no and that's final.
> 
> Thanks for all the help and now I am leaving this thread for good. So all the nice things you say about me will go unnoticed.
> 
> Ciao


 
and I'd just found you a nice little flat in Coldharbour Lane for £170pw  

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7867715


----------



## vauxhallmum (Jan 17, 2011)

Can I have that job, please? Since you don't want it anymore...


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jan 17, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> and I'd just found you a nice little flat in Coldharbour Lane for £170pw
> 
> http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&pid=7867715


 Coukd be chauffered into work with the saving on the rent too


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 17, 2011)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> Coukd be chauffered into work with the saving on the rent too



Would probably need it as he'd probably be too scared to walk to the station.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 17, 2011)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> You're really not endearing yourself to Londoners you know



After all that advice, he's staying in smock wearing land


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Jan 18, 2011)

19sixtysix said:


> After all that advice, he's staying in smock wearing land



 

Well it's up to him.


The way I look at is.....London is so unique and diverse and otherwhelming (and downright ruddy big! ) that it's totally different from other parts of the UK, especially the rural parts.

 If you want to go and live in London, and get the chance, do it and put up with the imperfections. If you don't want to live there, almost no amount of money should be enough to persuade you otherwise, unless, I suppose it is really silly money and you can take your pick of the whole south eastern quarter of the nation- even then you've got to be happy commuting.

Like I say, you can waste a lot of your life waiting for the 'perfect' scenario to do something....spoken from experience


----------



## Cowley (Jan 18, 2011)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Which is why I upped sticks and moved out to Surrey. Where there are no poor people. Apart from the people with no money.


----------

