Two thirds of under-30s now on 30 to 40-year mortgages -the smart way on to the ladder

A 40-year mortgage is a brilliant way onto the ladder and a terrible place to stay. With house prices so far ahead of wages, stretching the term is often the only way under-30s can make the numbers work, so these statistic do not come as a surprise - on a £200,000 loan at 4.5% the move from 25 to 35 years buys £165 a month of breathing room. But that breathing room has a price tag: £64,000 of extra interest, rising to £98,000 at 40 years.

Treated properly, longer term mortgages should only be considered initially, not as a life sentence: overpay when pay rises come and shorten the term at every remortgage where possible. If you get a mortgage on a 35 years, aim to get out on a shorter term.

The danger is not the long term itself, it is setting and forgetting it.

This is due to necessity. People have accepted that they will be working longer and with rising costs and increased life expectancy it makes sense to spread the mortgage debt. For many borrowers there is little choice, affordability is at creaking point and even with a decade of additional interest it is a better option than renting.

The honest read is that a 40-year term has become the price of admission for a lot of young buyers. I wouldn't judge anyone for using one. With house prices this high relative to earnings, stretching the term is the main lever left to bring the monthly payment down to something manageable, and the payment is exactly what stops this group buying. So it works, and it does buy real breathing room early on. But it's worth being clear about what it is: a symptom of unaffordability more than a clever strategy. You pay considerably more interest over the life of the loan, and you risk carrying a mortgage well into later life. The discipline is to treat 40 years as a starting point, not a destination, and to shorten the term or overpay as income grows, rather than leaving it to run untouched. Used that way it's a sensible bridge onto the ladder. The worrying part is what it says about affordability: a long mortgage is now simply the cost of getting on at all.

These 'marathon mortgages' are helping people get on the property ladder which is a good thing. The issue is that the interest really does rack up over the years. Just because you initially sign up for a really long mortgage, it does not mean you cannot reduce the mortgage term when you come to remortgage. Maybe this is a few years after you've got on the property ladder and you are earning more money. Often the best time to do this is when it's time to remortgage and select a new fixed or tracker rate, or switch to a new lender.

I’m a mortgage adviser and I took out a 40-year mortgage myself. The market was volatile and I’d become fed up with waiting for the right property, at the right time, in the right market. You can paralyse yourself waiting for all 3 to line up.

For us, the longer term gave us the breathing room to move forward while keeping the monthly payment at a level that still allowed us to afford a life alongside the mortgage.

I think younger buyers have grown up much more comfortable reviewing and changing things as life changes. Your first mortgage probably won’t be your last, just as your first home may only suit one stage of your life.

There is usually a compromise somewhere. A longer term can give someone room while they’re building a career, starting a family and dealing with rising household costs. We overpay ours when we can, and I think that flexibility is the important bit. Take the term you need today, understand the long-term cost, then keep reviewing it as your circumstances change

The longer terms do give breathing space, but a mortgage shouldn't be viewed in it's entirety. It's a series of 2 or 5 year term loans, giving flexibility as life changes

A longer mortgage term solves the monthly payment problem, but it does not solve the overall cost problem. For many younger buyers, a 30 or 40-year term is now the difference between buying a home and remaining in rented accommodation, so it can provide useful breathing room.

However, lower monthly repayments come from repaying the capital more slowly. If the mortgage runs for the full term, the borrower will pay more interest and may still have repayments approaching retirement.

The sensible approach is to treat a longer term as a starting point rather than a life sentence. As earnings rise or other expenses fall, borrowers can consider overpaying within their lender’s allowance or shortening the term when they remortgage.

A shorter term is not automatically better if it leaves someone financially stretched every month. The right mortgage should remain affordable after bills, emergencies and potential rate changes, while including a realistic plan to reduce the debt over time.

A 40-year mortgage is not inherently irresponsible. It lowers the compulsory monthly payment and can give a younger buyer breathing room while earnings develop. If overpayments are allowed, the borrower can pay more when affordable without committing to that higher amount every month.

But a lower monthly payment is not a cheaper mortgage. On £250,000 at 4.5%, repayment is about £1,124 over 40 years, against £1,390 over 25 years. If the rate never changed and the loan ran for its full term, total interest would be roughly £289,000 rather than £167,000.

The danger is treating 40 years as the plan instead of a safety margin. Buyers should review the term as income rises, overpay within any penalty-free allowance and consider shortening it when remortgaging. Advisers must also test whether payments extending towards retirement remain credible. Longer terms are a practical response to affordability pressures, but they do not solve the gap between house prices and earnings.

Longer mortgage terms make sense in the early stages of home ownership.

Monthy payments are as affordable as they can be, and borrowers can then make overpayments at their discretion, subject to allowances, where their financial position improves.

Changing the term of the mortgage in the future is always an option.

For many first-time buyers, a longer mortgage term can provide useful financial breathing room when they need it most. They’re often adjusting to new household bills, buying furniture or decorating, while their careers and incomes may still be developing. Committing to a higher monthly payment just to have a shorter term can leave very little room when the boiler breaks or the car needs an expensive repair.

A longer term also gives flexibility. Borrowers can make overpayments when they can afford to and review or shorten the term each time they remortgage. It doesn’t have to mean taking 40 years to repay the mortgage, but it can mean keeping the compulsory monthly payment manageable in the early years.

Yes, a 40-year term can be the stepping stone that gets you onto the ladder, but it isn't a win, it's the price younger buyers now pay, because house prices have pulled so far away from wages. My view? This won't stop at 40 years, we'll soon be having the same conversation about 45 or 50-year terms.

Take one on and the term isn't the end of the conversation, it's the start. You need a plan to bring it down, whether that's overpaying or shortening it at remortgage. Skip that plan and you're signing up to a mortgage that runs into retirement.

If you're in your thirties on a 40-year term with no plan to reduce it, you could be paying it off into your seventies. That's not just a mortgage question, it's a retirement one. Start planning for retirement now, not in your fifties, and get a conversation with a financial planner in the diary early, before the term's had a chance to run away from you.

Young buyers aren't choosing 40-year terms because they want to; the maths is choosing for them. The term you sign at 28 is rarely the term you finish on, and most buyers could shorten it at remortgage as their pay rises and their loan size shrinks. Used properly, a long term is a way in, then you claw the years back. The worry is why two-thirds of under-30s need one in the first place: house prices have pulled so far ahead of wages that a 25-year term no longer passes the affordability. We expect 40 years to quietly become the new normal for first-time buyers.