
Is your fixed mortgage deal ending? Brokers reveal what those facing higher payments can do
Between July and the end of December this year, an estimated 900,000 households will reach the end of their existing fixed rate term, according to UK Finance data.
Many will be coming off mortgage rates between 1 and 2 per cent, taken at a time when interest rates were at rock bottom.
Now, for the most part they face the prospect of remortgaging to a rate of around 4 per cent or more.
The lowest five-year fixed rate in August 2020 was 1.33 per cent, according to Moneyfacts. Now, it is 3.86 per cent.
On a £200,000 mortgage with a 25-year repayment term, that's the difference between paying £784 and £1,040 a month.
The jump in costs makes the decision on whether to fix for two or five years feel even more important.
Short-term fix: Many households will be opting for two-year fixes because the consensus is that interest rates will continue to fall and mortgage rates will follow suit
Two-year fixes offer borrowers the chance to lock in for a short period of time in the hope that deals will be cheaper when they next come to remortgage.
Five-year fixes will appeal to those that think the risk isn't worth taking, accepting there is no guarantee that mortgage rates will be lower come 2027.
Key deciding factors also include whether someone may move home soon, how much they prefer the security of fixed payments for longer and how well they could cope with a rise in mortgage bills.
For those who feel a two-year deal is slightly too short and a five-year fix too long, there are now also plenty of three-year deals.
Two-year fix is current mortgage preference
Santander's mortgage lending figures suggest a preference for shorter-term fixed rate deals.
Of its 60,000 customers so far this year, it says 54 per cent opted for two-year fixes compared to just 36 per cent opting for five-year deals.
The bank's lowest two-year fixed rate remortgage deal is currently 3.8 per cent, while its lowest five-year fix is 3.86 per cent - both come with £1,058 of fees.
However, others say the gap is not as dramatic. Mortgage broker, Mortgage Advice Bureau says that since the start of the year, 54,534 of its customers have taken a two-year fix compared to 49,927 who opted for a five-year deal.
David Hollingworth, associate director at L&C Mortgages says he recently saw two customers that were coming to the end of their very low five-year fixed rate deals - both less than 2 per cent.
The first is thinking about a two-year deal which will see an increase to a rate of 3.92 per cent and push payments up by almost £490 a month.
The other is considering a five-year fix which would result in a 3.96 per cent rate and push their payments up by more than £500 per month.
Neither chose to extend their mortgage term - one of the options to reduce unaffordable monthly payments, though it increases the amount owed over the long term.
'Both have decided to keep their mortgage term the same and are taking on the additional monthly cost,' said Hollingworth.
'Of course, they've made different decisions about how long to fix for which may come down to a combination of how much they think rates may move in the next couple of years and how much certainty of payment they want for how long.
'There's no right or wrong answer to that and we'll only know with hindsight which approach works out to be the cheapest.'
Should you stick with your current lender?
Aaron Strutt of mortgage broker Trinity Financial says the vast majority of borrowers are sticking with their existing lender when it is time to refinance.
Households coming to the end of a fixed-rate mortgage should be offered what is known as a 'product transfer' by their current lender.
This gives them the option to switch to a new deal instead of automatically being moved onto their lender's more expensive standard variable rate.
The benefit of product transfers is that borrowers don't have to go through all the same checks and balances they would if switching to a new lender - though it might also prevent them from getting the best possible deal, as there is no guarantee their lender will have the market best-buy at the time they need to remortgage.
Product transfers tend to require less paperwork, no new affordability assessment, and no re-valuation of the property.
There are typically few to no additional product fees required, and no solicitor costs either.
However, Strutt suggests that the extra admin of switching to a different lender may be worth it.
He says: 'We did go through quite a prolonged period where the lenders were offering cheaper rates for people buying a home rather than remortgaging. This seems to have shifted with some lenders much keener to attract remortgage customers again.
'If your deal is coming to an end soon then it is well worth checking to see if there are better rates available through rival lenders. There's no point in giving your lender money for the sake of it.
'Competition in the market has improved and there are lots of deals available below 4 per cent.'
Some switch to raise cash or pay off debt
There has been a rise in the number of people remortgaging to raise funds for home improvements or pay off debt, according to Strutt.
'We are arranging more remortgages with capital raising for people who want another £20,000 or £30,000 for home improvements, while other homeowners are doing debt consolidation remortgages,' said Strutt.
'One of our clients recently did a huge refurbishment on his property and increased the value significantly.
'He remortgaged away from his lender to recoup the money he spent and locked into a sub-4 per cent five-year fix.
'We have also had clients remortgaging to gift a deposit to their adult children to help them get on the property ladder.'
Paying off some of the mortgage debt, or carrying out renovations that significantly increase your property's value, can mean that someone may get a lower mortgage rate.
Both enable households to build up greater equity within the property, whilst the percentage owned by their mortgage lender reduces.
These levels of equity that measure the size of the mortgage versus the property's value are known as loan-to-value.
Lenders will have different rates at varying loan-to-value levels, and someone at 60 per cent loan-to-value (in other words, with 40 per cent equity) could pay substantially less than someone at 90 per cent loan-to-value.
'Paying off some of your mortgage may mean you qualify for a better rate,' adds Strutt. 'If you have done renovation work to your property it may well be worth getting another valuation done by your lender or another one to see you have more equity.'
Extend the mortgage term to lower payments
Nichola Jomoa, a mortgage adviser at Mortgage Advice Bureau says she has seen borrowers increasing the term of the mortgage in order to cope with higher rates.
The mortgage term is the number of years someone agrees to repay their mortgage for, which used to commonly be 25 years but on new mortgages is more often 30 years.
By lengthening the term of a mortgage, a borrower spreads their repayments over a longer period of time and therefore reduces the monthly costs.
However, it will mean paying interest for a longer period of time and therefore paying more in the long run.
For example, someone with a £200,000 mortgage paying 4.5 per cent interest over 20 years would face monthly repayments of £1,265, paying a total of £303,672 over the lifespan of the mortgage.
Conversely, someone with a £200,000 mortgage paying the same interest rate over a 40-year term would face monthly repayments of £899. However, they would pay £431,580 over the lifespan of the mortgage: £127,908 more than on a 20-year term.
'We are seeing an increased number of clients extending their mortgage term to keep their monthly payment at an affordable level,' said Jomoa.
'This may not always be possible and can be impacted by age. In some cases, it can lead to a higher interest rate.
'It could mean mortgage payments continue into retirement, and can potentially add several years of expensive interest to mortgage balances.'
It is possible to reduce the term again later on if financial circumstances change.
I'm cancelling my gym subsrption to afford the monthly payments
Roque Way, a technical director for an IT company bought his home in Brentford with his partner almost five years ago.
The one bedroom flat, which they bought with help to buy in 2020 has a mortgage on it of 1.58 per cent.
However, now they are trying to remortgage and the best rate they can get is 3.92 per cent.
Roque says this will see their monthly costs rise from £857 at the moment to £1,285, even with the part that will remain on the government Help to Buy rate, which is below 2 per cent at present.
'I'm just glad we were sensible and didn't over extend ourselves by buying a two bed five years ago. I think we would be in a lot more trouble if we had done so.
'But the jump in costs is still going to have an impact on our lives. Up until now, we have been halving the mortgage costs between us, but this will just become to much for my partner when we remortgage, so I'm going to cover the extra.
For me, this will mean adjusting my liefstyle a bit and cutting back on various things. I'll have to cancel my gym subscriptiuon for a start.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Travel chaos as ScotRail hit by network outage
Rail passengers in part of the UK have been plunged into travel chaos today as a major network grapples with a 'network outage.' ScotRail's ticket and payment systems have been hit with IT issues at some of Scotland's busiest stations, including Glasgow Central, Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh Waverley. The rail network, which runs 95 per cent of passenger services in Scotland, said its internet service provider is experiencing a 'network outage' at a 'small number of locations' across the country. Passengers are reporting problems buying tickets on the ScotRail app as well as on machines at various stations. A warning on the app for trains between Glasgow and Edinburgh also states: 'Customer information screens and live departure boards may be showing inaccurately at ScotRail stations.' One frustrated passenger took to X to demand answers from ScotRail this morning, writing: 'Journeycheck doesn't appear to be updating today. For example no mention of the disruption at Stirling this morning and cancellations/delays.' Another pleaded: 'Please update your app/live times, no trains from bridge of allan. No one answered live help, no information at all.' Alan Manclark, ScotRail's head of IT, said the network is 'aware of an issue being experienced by our internet service provider.' He added that the issue is 'affecting connectivity at a small number of locations across the country, including Edinburgh Waverley, Glasgow Central, and Glasgow Queen Street.' He continued: 'Our supplier is working hard to resolve the issue, and we're sorry to customers for the inconvenience while we await a fix.' It comes as rail commuters face paying hundreds of pounds more for season tickets next year amid forecasts that fares in England could jump by nearly 6 per cent. This is based on a measure of inflation announced by the Office for National Statistics ( ONS ) today which said Retail Price Index (RPI) inflation rose to 4.8 per cent in July. The government has not said how it will determine the cap on regulated fare rises in 2026, but this year's 4.6 per cent hike was one percentage point above RPI last July. If that formula is used to set next year's fare increase, the cost of rail travel will jump by 5.8 per cent. Britain's train punctuality is at its lowest level in more than five years.


The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Fact check: Wage claim confuses mean and median incomes from different years
A widely shared claim on social media said that the median wage was £24,769 in 2008 and £29,600 by 2025. Meanwhile, the claim continued, inflation has increased prices by 70.51% since 2008, meaning that a £24,769 wage would have become £42,231 if it had kept up with inflation. Evaluation The claim does not have any sources attached to it, but it seems likely the post is comparing very different figures. The person posting appears to have cited a figure for mean income – not median – from 2004/05 instead of 2008, with a median household income figure – not mean wage – from 2019 rather than 2025. The facts Where does the claim of a £24,769 median wage in 2008 come from? The poster claimed that the median wage was £24,769 in 2008, without giving a source. It is not clear where this figure was obtained from. It is possible that the user took this figure from a Wikipedia article which somewhat misleadingly cites a report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). The Wikipedia article correctly lists the £24,769 figure as the mean, rather than the median which the social media poster claimed. But the Wikipedia article also says that the figure is '2008 data'. This is correct insofar as the IFS report was released in 2008. However, the Wikipedia article does not make it clear that the figure is actually from the 2004/05 fiscal year, not from 2008. The mean is the average number in a data set, whereas the median is the middle value when the set is in numerical order. The figures used by the IFS were taken from the 2004/05 survey of personal incomes (SPI) from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). In its report the IFS updated the figures to present them in the equivalent 2007/08 prices. Where does the claim of a £29,600 mean wage in 2025 come from? The poster also claimed without a source that the median wage is £29,600 in 2025. Again it is not clear where this figure has been found. The number matches the Office for National Statistics median household income figure for 2019, making that one potential source for the claim. However, median household income is not the same as median wage. A Google search found that the number also matches an unsourced figure on a jobs website which claims that the 'average salary in the UK (2025)' is £29,600. However, apart from updating the year, this page has not been changed since 2020 when it also listed the 'average salary in the UK (2020)' as the same – £29,600. Owing to the timing it is possible that this website has taken its 'average salary' figure from 2019's household income. The oldest archived version of the page is from April 9 2020, while the ONS's median household income figure was released just a month earlier on March 5. What would the £24,769 income be worth in 2004/05? The IFS's report does not appear to reveal its exact method for calculating the change in wage value between 2004/05 and 2007/08. It simply cites 'authors' calculations based on SPI 2004–05'. That is a reference to the Survey of Personal Incomes (SPI) from that year which the PA news agency has been unable to find. However, the report says that the basic tax allowance of £4,745 in 2004/05 would have been worth £5,140 in 2007/08 prices. This suggests an increase in prices by approximately 8.32% which – allowing for rounding errors – appears close to the 8.45% change in Consumer Prices Index (CPI) between 2005 and 2008. This would mean that an income worth £24,769 in 2007/08 prices would have been worth around £22,866 – again allowing for rounding errors – in 2004/05. What would have happened if salaries had kept up with inflation since 2004/05? Because the income stated is from 2004/05, not 2008 as claimed, the inflation rate since 2008 is not relevant. Between 2005 and 2024 – the last full year for which data is available – prices increased by around 71.45% according to the CPI measurement. This implies that the mean income in 2004/05 (£22,866) would be around £39,202 in 2024 if it had kept up with inflation – again allowing for rounding errors. If comparing CPI figures from March 2005 – the last month of the 2004/05 fiscal year – with the most recent CPI figure in June 2025, inflation has seen prices rise by 79.23%. That would mean the mean salary from 2004/05 would be around £40,981 had it kept up with inflation. Median income in 2004/05 was £16,400. If that income had kept pace with price increases of 71.45% it would be worth £28,117. At the 79.23% inflation rate it would be worth £29,393. What are mean and median incomes today? According to HMRC data, median income before tax was £28,400 in 2023 – the latest year for which an SPI survey has been published. This figure is for individuals, not for households. The mean income in the same year was £40,400. What is the difference between median and mean? Both median and mean are two different ways of measuring the average. The mean is arrived at by adding every value together in a dataset and then dividing it by the number of entries in that dataset. For instance, if calculating mean income, you add together the income of every person in the dataset, whether that be £20,000 per year or £200,000 per year, and then divide that figure by the number of people whose income you have measured. The median is very different. To measure the median you line up all the values in a dataset in ascending order and choose the entry exactly in the middle. The benefit of this approach is that it cannot be skewed by a small number of really high earners at the top. In a way it can be seen as the difference between calculating the average amount that people earn (mean) or calculating what the average person earns (median). – Personal Income Statistics Tables 3.1 to 3.11, 3.16 and 3.17 for the tax year 2022 to 2023 (archived, see Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 for relevant data)


Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Sir Jim Ratcliffe's Ineos counter-sue Spurs over deal linked to Harry Kane transfer
Ineos is counter-suing Tottenham Hotspur for more than £1m after accusing them of holding sponsorship talks with Audi linked to the sale of Harry Kane to Bayern Munich. As revealed by Telegraph Sport, Spurs are suing Sir Jim Ratcliffe's Ineos Automotive Limited for more than £11m over allegations it breached a five-year, minimum £17.5m deal signed in 2022 for the club to promote the firm's Grenadier as their 'official 4x4 vehicle partner'. The contract was terminated on March 11 by Tottenham, who launched legal action in June claiming Ineos failed to pay a £5m-plus annual instalment due on Dec 1, having earlier not paid an inflation-related figure of almost £500,000. According to the 'particulars of claim' submitted by Spurs, the club are also seeking a minimum of £5,275,974 in damages after the deal was ended with more than two years left to run. In a defence and counter-claim submitted to the High Court last week, Ineos said: 'The particulars of claim make no mention of a highly significant series of events by which the club, unbeknown to Ineos, started negotiating with a major competitor to Ineos with the intention of granting rights to that competitor which were exclusive to Ineos under the agreement.' It added: 'On or around 3 August 2023 (i.e. early in contract year two), Todd Kline of the club ('Mr Kline') indicated to Ashley Reed of Ineos ('Mr Reed') that the club had been in discussions with the German car manufacturer Audi AG ('Audi') in connection with rights which were the same as, or substantially similar to, the rights granted to Ineos under the agreement and/or the club had been negotiating with Audi in respect of rights which were exclusive to Ineos under clause 4 of the agreement. According to Mr Kline, the discussions and/or negotiations related to a proposed transfer of the club's player Harry Kane ('Mr Kane') to the German club FC Bayern Munich ('Bayern Munich').' Ineos' defence went to state that this commercial partnership had 'not materialised' but also said 'this sequence of events ultimately resulted in the parties agreeing that Ineos could terminate the agreement with effect from the end of year three of the contract term'. It added: 'In the circumstances, it is the club which owes Ineos more than £1 million for failing to provide any rights to Ineos in the final part of year three.' Contract row Tottenham's particulars of claim laid out details of a contract the club said involved annual payments starting at £2.125m in year one and increasing to £4.6 million in year five, all plus VAT and index-linked to the rate of inflation. Spurs said they were also claiming interest and 'further or other relief as the court thinks fit'. The club declined to comment on their lawsuit. An Ineos spokesperson said: 'Ineos Automotive was a partner of Tottenham Hotspur from 2022, expanding on a partnership agreement that Ineos Group had in place with the club since 2020. 'We had a contractual right to terminate our partnership contract and in December 2024 exercised that right.' When news of the legal action first emerged in December, Ratcliffe's firm told Telegraph Sport: 'Like any business, we have to be diligent in how we operate and where we invest marketing budgets. It's completely normal for partnerships to be reviewed on a regular basis, and we've decided that the partnership wasn't working out for us. We have the right to terminate the partnership.' Spurs' claim was lodged less than a month after they beat Ratcliffe's United in the Europa League final to secure a place in the Champions League. Cutting ties Tottenham and Ineos had been in partnership since the petrochemicals company was named as the club's 'official hand-sanitiser supplier' during the coronavirus crisis. Ineos, however, has been cutting ties with a number of leading sports organisations in recent months, notably Sir Ben Ainslie's sailing team and the All Blacks rugby union team. Telegraph Sport revealed in February that New Zealand Rugby was also taking legal action against Ineos for an alleged breach of contract after a six-year deal to 2027 ended early, although an agreement was subsequently reached. Ineos has said that it is being forced into cost-cutting by Europe's 'extreme' green carbon taxes and has issued warnings over what it called the 'deindustrialisation' of the continent. Ratcliffe also blamed energy prices and carbon taxes earlier this year for forcing the closure of Ineos's synthetic ethanol plant at Grangemouth in Scotland, resulting in the loss of 80 direct roles and an estimated 500 indirect jobs. Significant financial measures have already been introduced at United since Ratcliffe bought a 27.7 per cent minority stake in December 2023, including increased ticket prices and the loss of hundreds of staff. Upon the announcement of the Grenadier deal in 2022, Spurs had said: 'Our partnership with Ineos Grenadier represents the coming together of an innovative British brand with an iconic London football club – both of whom are committed to pushing boundaries and daring to do things differently, while staying true to authentic values and traditions.'