As housing prices continue to soar under a government in place that doesn't really seem to understand the concept of supply and demand, sometimes it feels like you'll never be able to get that foot on the housing ladder your smug friends are already climbing and which your annoying relatives keep telling you 'you need to get on sooner rather than later'.
But, it turns out that this may not necessarily be as impossible as you think - if you're willing to up sticks and move that is.
A new study by Zoopla suggests that it may actually be more cost-effective to buy, rather than rent, in 36 per cent of UK cities. Perhaps unsurprisingly, there's a geographical slant to proceedings, with Scotland and the north of England both locations where buying your own place could actually be a money saver.
Zoopla looked at asking prices and rents for two-bedroom properties - a hypothetical first-time buyer home - and assumed that buyers would be able to raise a 10 per cent deposit (yes, that's still a mighty assumption but go with us here). They also adopted a 25-year mortgage, and a fixed interest rate at the current average 'best buy' rate of 4.5 per cent.
Across the whole country, it still worked out at £58 a month more expensive to buy that property, rather than to rent it, but a series of cities bucked the overall trend; with the top five comprising of Glasgow, Dundee, Birmingham, Edinburgh and Coventry/Manchester; in Glasgow, you'd save £149 a month.
Meanwhile, the places where it's still vastly more cost-effective to rent than to buy include London, Reading, Cambridge, Brighton and Aberdeen, with London way ahead of the rest in terms of expense - buying costs a whopping £1,084 a month more than renting, a consequence of the intense competition for property in the capital from foreign investors.
Lawrence Hall, a spokesman for Zoopla.co.uk, said: "If they can make the leap, and are willing to relinquish the flexibility that comes with renting, tenants up North in particular would be much better off buying and paying off a mortgage every month."
While London and the South East are "by no means cheap places to rent... growing pressure on housing supply in this corner of the UK from professionals, families and overseas investors means that getting a foothold on to the property ladder in these areas is only becoming a more costly endeavour, and the mortgage payments attached to this are rising to bridge this gap."
The Top 10 Cities Where Buying Beats Renting (Rent cost/buy cost/percentage saving per month)
1. Glasgow, £596, £447, 33%
2. Dundee, £522, £412, 27%
3. Birmingham, £678, £581, 17%
4. Hull, £452, £397, 14%
=5. Manchester, £600, £546, 10%
=5. Coventry, £652, £596, 10%
7. Edinburgh, £852, £790 8%
=8. Rotherham, £426, £397, 7%
=8. Bradford, £452, £422, 7%
10. Sheffield, £552, £521, 6%
The Top 10 Cities Where Renting Beats Buying (Rent cost/buy cost/percentage saving per month)
1. London, £2,218, £3,302, 49%
2. Reading, £1,041, £1,341, 29%
3. Cambridge, £1,104, £1,415, 28%
4. Brighton, £1,252, £1,564, 25%
5. Aberdeen, £904, £1,117, 24%
=6. Bristol, £878, £1,060, 21%
=6. Norwich, £659, £795, 21%
=8. York, £796, £914, 15%
=8. Bedford, £752, £861, 15%
10. Southampton, £804, £918, 14%