
I swapped my home ownership dream for a 42-foot narrowboat
Swapping bricks and mortar for boats and water may seem a pretty extreme way to handle the soaring cost of home ownership.
But with house prices, rents and the general cost of living rising beyond anything I could afford, that is exactly what I've done.
I have swapped my dream of owning a house for the reality of owning a 42-foot narrowboat, which is now a home for me and my greyhound, Meg.
As a child, I had always assumed that I would be merrily funnelled through the pipeline of work hard, save up, buy house, watch house price rise, pay off mortgage, retire comfortably.
But thanks to high house prices, that model is increasingly broken, especially in the south of England – and particularly if you are not buying with a partner.
Combine that with the cost of living crisis, which is still very much with us, and you have a situation perfectly designed to leave single hard-working adults in their 20s and 30s still living at home with their parents or renting shared properties.
At times, adjusting to that reality left me very dejected. It felt like a social contract had been broken by house prices rising far more quickly than wages, with no fix in sight.
Then my rebellious streak kicked in. If the housing system is no longer working for me, then maybe it was time to live outside that system. Stop worrying, start living.
I did briefly consider renting a home, but there were certain things I wasn't prepared to compromise on when it came to accommodation. I'm 37, and my days of sharing a property are over – especially when you bring soaring rental prices into the equation. A one-bedroom property in Kent, where I live, now costs north of £1,000 a month, and that is very much out of my budget.
My dog limits my rental options even further. Out of interest I had called a few landlords that advertised properties as allowing pets, only to discover that, for the vast majority, 'pet' does not mean 'dog', it means 'a goldfish, maybe, if it's well-behaved'.
So the path of my life led me inexorably towards the canals.
The idea of buying a boat had coalesced slowly in my mind. When I rented a shared flat by the Grand Union canal in London many years ago, I had been fascinated by the colourful narrowboats and some of the equally colourful characters that lived on them.
Some lifestyle changes had also nudged me towards narrowboats. I have recently set up a freelance journalism business, Barker Editorial, after many years of working on Fleet Street newspapers. All I need to work is a phone, a notepad, a laptop and an internet connection, all of which I can do from anywhere.
Also, a breakup and house sale meant I was sitting on just enough money to buy a boat, which I had tucked away in Premium Bonds.
But save as I may, I knew that pot of money would never be enough to get me back on the housing ladder in the South, where my friends and family live. Not unless NS&I sent Agent Million to knock on my door to tell me I'd won the £1m jackpot.
Monthly costs are low
A major attraction of owning a narrowboat was the relatively low monthly cost of living compared to a house.
I bought mine outright for £33,000. You don't pay a mortgage or rent or council tax, provided you are a continuous cruiser without a home mooring. You also don't pay water bills, as these are included in the yearly fee paid to the Canal and River Trust to use their waterways, which for me is £1,118.64 a year.
The reduced space and simplicity of narrowboat life also lends itself to saving money.
I have very limited space on a 42-foot boat, especially when four feet of that space is taken up by my dog. The restricted storage means you can't own as much, or run an array of expensive electrical items, and that means saving money. You are also extremely incentivised to conserve costly things like food, diesel, smokeless fuel, gas and electricity, as all of these either need to be moved by me on to the boat or else generated onboard.
My typical monthly outgoings now are between £600 and £1,000, which includes all boat-related costs as well as groceries and things like vet bills and the cost of running a car. Anything I earn above that can be swept into savings or my pension.
Another part of the appeal of a boat is the security of ownership. In the past I have been made redundant, unhelpfully during the initial Covid lockdown, where employers battened down the hatches and stopped hiring. At points I have also been unable to work for long periods due to accidents and ill health.
Although I am in a better place now, I remember all too well that corrosive fear of losing work, burning through my savings and falling into arrears.
The idea of owning a boat outright that I can't be kicked out of – and isn't subject to sudden rent or mortgage increases – is very comforting. And of course, if I don't like my neighbours, or the view, then I can just fire up the engine and get some new ones.
...but there's a time cost
However, only a fool would think boating is automatically some sort of silver bullet to the housing crisis. There are some very good reasons why houses have caught on and we're not all living on the water.
Firstly, there is a lot of time and cost associated with maintaining a boat, more than most houses. For example, the hull needs repainting every few years and the engine servicing every couple of hundred hours. Diesel and water tanks must be cleaned, and batteries maintained.
A narrowboat is an off-grid home with everything you need to live, but is also a series of hidden pipes, pumps and cables that can and will fail in the least convenient time and place. Frequent high repair bills mean barge owners joke about 'boat' standing for 'bung on another thousand'.
Then there's the cost of diesel for the engine, wood and smokeless coal for the fire and gas bottles for the oven, all of which have to be sourced and often lugged manually on to the boat.
There is a cost to time itself, and there can be a lot of time associated with keeping a narrowboat going.
Unlike a house, it is also a depreciating asset. If you buy one then you need to be comfortable knowing that you will almost certainly sell it for less than you bought it for.
A well-maintained narrowboat will last for decades, and even some of the old working boats that are 80-plus years old are still afloat. But realistically most have a natural lifespan. If you buy one towards the end of that then you also need a plan for what happens when you have to move off it and sell it for scrap.
But so long as you buy the right boat, in my view it remains one of the cheapest ways to live.
'It can be as safe as living in a shed'
There are other downsides to boat life besides cost. You are forced to deal with the elements far more than when living in a house, for example.
Safety is another issue. A narrowboat is not much harder to break into than the average garden shed, and unlit towpaths at night can attract all sorts of urchins. Things that go bump in the night definitely knock a lot harder when you live alone on a boat, so you have to take sensible precautions, rely on the watchful eyes of other boaters and get good insurance.
Fortunately, I love the lifestyle. I was brought up on a farm, so I'm used to the rain and the cold and the mud and the chores, and I'm in love with the natural world and the changing of the seasons, so living on a boat doesn't faze me.
The process of buying a boat is simultaneously entertaining and fraught with pitfalls.
Some of the boats I looked around had ceilings so low I could not stand up in them, which brokers tenaciously ignored during the viewings. With others, the sales photos hid a multitude of sins, from corroded hulls to rotten wood and dangerously bodged plumbing and gas pipes.
So it is important to get a survey where the boat is hauled out of the water, which will likely cost £1,000 or more. Just like buying a house, some parts of the boat are inaccessible when it comes to surveys, so there is always a slight leap of faith.
The two most expensive things on a narrowboat to go wrong are the hull and the engine.
My survey came back fine, showing the metal of the hull was just as solid as the day the boat first hit the water 22 years ago. The boat has a reliable, British-made Beta Marine engine with relatively low running hours and had been regularly maintained. If Vladimir Putin ever hits that big red button, that engine will share the apocalypse with the cockroaches.
Buying a boat at below-average rates for its size can also present you with more bills almost immediately, which bump up the overall cost of purchase.
Some would-be sellers put off the regular work that boats need when they want to sell up, because why spend lots of money on something you want to get rid of anyway? This can include things like painting the hull (£600-plus), four-yearly safety certificates (£200-plus) or expensive repair work, which can cost thousands, and which all has to be factored into the overall cost.
Some work needed to be done on my boat, but not much: a new cooker and fridge, the gas boiler needs a service, the walls need to be sanded and varnished, the rudder is slightly skewed and some windows need renovating.
I've hired tradesmen for some of the work, but a lot of work ends up being done by the boaters themselves – though it is still an extra cost. Learning how to service an engine involves a lot of swearing and scuffed knuckles, as well as a badly bruised wallet.
But the upsides to boat life, for me, make up for all the negatives. There are worse ways to start a morning than drinking coffee on the roof of the boat while the sun burns the mists off the water and curious ducks paddle up to say hello.
Likewise, it is hard to picture a better working environment than writing an article next to a cosy fire while my dog snores happily at my feet.
While I may never be able to own a house, at least when everything on the boat goes right I've bought peace with my money.

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


Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Telegraph
How Premium Bonds are making Britain poorer
Britain has a saving problem – or rather, an investing problem. We don't do enough of it. Just a quarter of savers invest in the stock market compared to two thirds of Americans, according to Hargreaves Lansdown. Meanwhile, just 6pc of us have a stocks and shares Isa, according to research firm Finder. This gap means that over the past decade, the majority of Britons have missed out on the 12pc average returned by the S&P 500 annually – an index of the largest American companies – along with the compounding interest that comes with it. Instead, most returns don't even beat inflation. The average UK savings account lost £2,718 in real terms between January 2014 and January 2024, Finder also found. Nothing quite illustrates Britain's affliction with subpar returns like Premium Bonds, the nation's favourite savings product, which are so popular that around 23 million savers have plunged almost £130bn into them. Premium Bonds allow British savers to offer up their cash for the Government to use as additional liquidity. In exchange, they have a chance of winning a prize each month worth between £25 and £1m. Crucially, there is an average equivalent prize rate – the percentage of annual bond deposits that the Government pays out as interest each year. Currently it is 3.8pc, below even the Bank of England base rate of 4.25pc. It is also below the best interest rates available – today's best easy-access savings accounts pay around 4.8pc. Ultimately, savers – who can hold up to £50,000 in Premium Bonds – clearly don't seem too fussed about the returns, because of the chance of winning big. 'It's a sophisticated lottery ticket,' says Gerrard Lyons, chief economic strategist at Netwealth, a wealth management firm. This optimism is costing British savers. Just under 14.4 million current Premium Bond holders, or almost two-thirds, have never won a prize, according to a Freedom of Information request by investment firm AJ Bell. 'There is a huge amount of money making no return whatsoever when savers could otherwise be raking in more than 4.5pc if they were to shop around for other products on the market,' says Charlene Young, senior pensions and savings expert at AJ Bell. For the majority of Premium Bond holders who have never won a prize, their funds are not just languishing but actively losing money in real terms – especially as inflation has roared away in recent years. Any money held in Premium Bonds for the past decade that has not won any prizes has lost around a quarter of its real value – which illustrates how the longevity of Premium Bonds has been particularly damaging to national savings. 'Savers might be better off considering other options with their cash rather than leaving it to chance in a Premium Bonds account, particularly over the long term. For example, if they took more risk and invested the money instead,' adds Young. Young is correct – if a saver bought the maximum possible £50,000 of Premium Bonds a decade ago, they would have earned around £10,000 in prizes, assuming they won an average prize each month. If they had instead invested that money into the S&P 500 – an index of the largest American companies – they would today be sitting on over £150,000, including their original stake. George Sweeney of Finder says: 'Our love affair with long odds means that plenty of ordinary savers are missing out on actually growing their hard-earned cash with high interest rates or the potential growth from investing – with decent interest rates galore in cash Isas that are also tax-free, there's no longer a reason for people to be missing out.' Another problem with Premium Bonds is that those who hold the maximum amount of £50,000 cannot reinvest any prizes they win to boost their odds for future draws. This means that they lose the benefit of compounding returns that comes with normal savings accounts, as well as investing. 'There's a clear need to boost national savings – that should be a high priority,' adds Lyons. 'There is an argument that there should be a fairer outcome for savers. If [Premium Bonds] are your only form of savings, that's probably not the best way to save.' Sweeney adds: 'I think our lofty dreams of big wins are sadly misplaced. With high interest rates from cash Isas on the table, ease of access into investment markets and fairly generous pension terms, Premium Bonds should effectively be a last-resort punt once people have made the most of all their other tax-efficient savings accounts, investments and pensions.' Premium Bonds were introduced in 1956, in part to encourage Britons to save. Today, Chancellor Rachel Reeves is so desperate to encourage investment among the populace that she has even considered scrapping cash Isas, which unlike Premium Bonds, actually offer guaranteed returns. In order to boost the wealth of ordinary Britons, there must be an improvement in education levels surrounding investing, argues Michael Healy, UK managing director of investment firm IG Group. 'A large portion of the nation's savings remains trapped in low-return products that simply preserve capital rather than grow it, holding back people from achieving real financial progress. 'We urgently need a reboot in how we educate people about saving and investing, so more can move beyond short-term safety nets and start building for the future.' Lyons adds: 'There is a level of opaqueness in the investment industry, especially regarding fees. People don't get as actively involved here as they do in the US, where there is a greater level of awareness. We need more awareness of the fees people are charged, and the kinds of returns people can get.' A spokesman for National Savings and Investments (NS&I) said: 'Premium Bonds are one of the nation's favourite savings products, offering bond holders the excitement of the possibility of winning tax-free prizes each month while knowing their investment is safe and secure. 'Unlike some other forms of investing, Premium Bonds offer savers 100pc security backed by the Government, and bond holders can cash in all or part of their original investment at any time. 'Every Premium Bonds number has a separate and equal chance of winning a prize each month, however, the more bonds you have, the better your chances of winning. 'We pay out millions of prizes each month, and since Premium Bonds started in 1957 have paid out over £36bn in prizes to our bond holders.'


Reuters
a day ago
- Reuters
MEG Energy's Christina Lake project in Alberta ramping up to full operations after wildfires
June 11 (Reuters) - Oil and gas producer MEG Energy ( opens new tab said on Wednesday its Christina Lake regional project in Alberta was ramping up to full operations, following recent regional wildfires south of the facility. The company said it has safely returned all personnel to the Christina Lake site and has begun restarting Phase 2B operations after the successful completion of a scheduled turnaround. MEG said in late May it had evacuated workers from the facility after wildfires triggered a power outage, delaying the Phase 2B restart. The phase accounts for about 70,000 barrels per day of production. Wildfires across Alberta in May disrupted operations for several oil producers, including Canadian Natural Resources ( opens new tab and Cenovus Energy ( opens new tab, prompting temporary shutdowns and evacuations at multiple sites.


Daily Mail
05-06-2025
- Daily Mail
Why did NS&I name the precise town where the most recent £1m Premium Bonds jackpot winner came from?
In the most recent Premium Bonds draw, I noticed that one of the £1million jackpot winners was from Stockport, Greater Manchester. However, I was under the impressions that usually it's the county that is named, not the exact location. Looking through the list I see Hertfordshire, Devon, Kent, Wales... but not specific large towns or cities in these areas. Why is it that Stockport is named - alongside other more specific locations like Barnet, Croydon, Norwich and Fife to name a few? Helen Kirrane, This is Money's savings reporter, replies: June's Premium Bonds £1million prize winners hailed from Stockport and Edinburgh in this month's NS&I draw. The Stockport winner was only the second ever £1million prize winner to come from the town, while the Edinburgh winner was the first £1million jackpot winner from the Scottish capital in eight years. But why was Stockport reported as the location of one of the £1million winners but the other £1million prize winner's location was reported as the city of Edinburgh which is a local authority? Other high value prize winners this month were reported as coming from even broader areas like West Midlands, as in the case of a £100,000 prize winner who won with a holding of £2,000. The answer comes down to the way NS&I reports the location of prize winners. NS&I sets rules when announcing the location of prize winners to protect identities. Each customer is assigned to a town, local authority, county or government standard region and country. When a winner is assigned to a town with less than 100,000 account holders, NS&I use the hierarchy below until it finds a level where that area has at least 100,000 Premium Bonds holders. These are: Level 1 Royal Mail Postcode Address File (PAF) Town (like Blackpool); Level 2 County or Local Authority (like Lancashire); Level 3 Government Standard Region (like North West); Level 4 Country (like Wales). Stockport falls into the bracket of place with more than 100,000 Premium Bond holders - the borough population is just shy of 300,000, which suggests at least one in three Stopfordians hold the popular products. The local authority of Stockport had 105,484 Premium Bonds holders in the June 2025 draw, according to NS&I so it was able to report the precise area the winner was from. A spokesman from NS&I says: 'Each month NS&I publishes a full list of prizes won including the winning bond number, size of holding and the location of the Bond holder. 'However, to protect the identity of individual Premium Bonds's holders we identify the location based on at least 100,000 bond holders living in the area. This could be the town or city, county or local authority, government Standard region or country.' With this month's £1million winners, there are at least 100,000 Premium Bonds holders living in Stockport. Whereas the winner from Edinburgh will come from an area with fewer than 100,000 holders and so the county or local authority area is used. Different rules for reporting Premium Bonds winners from overseas apply. For Premium Bonds holders living outside the UK, NS&I only publishes the country when there are at least 100,000 holders living there. Otherwise, they publish the area as 'overseas'. For this reason, you will never see a Premium Bond's winner listed as being from the The Isle of Man or the Channel Islands, as they fall into this bracket. Guernsey has just over 19,000 Premium Bonds holders and Jersey just over 29,000 – taken together, this is far less than 100,000 Premium Bonds holders, so NS&I would not report this as Channel Islands. The default for reporting a winner from one of these areas would be 'overseas'.