£500,000-Plus Mortgages Grow Beyond London as Regional Borrowing Rises

The geography of Britain’s larger mortgages is broadening. New Savills analysis, reported on 21 October, shows that borrowing of £500,000 or more has grown across several regional markets since 2021, even as volumes in London and the South East have edged lower.

Across the UK, 62,391 mortgages at or above that threshold were issued in 2025, approximately one in every 17. The total was 24% higher than in 2024, although still 9% below the 2022 peak.

London remains the largest market, accounting for 42% of these loans in 2025. The change is in where growth is occurring, rather than evidence that the capital has lost its importance.

For borrowers, the findings challenge a familiar association between a large mortgage and a prime London purchase. A family home in Cheshire, a move within Edinburgh or a professional household buying in the Midlands can require substantial borrowing without resembling the traditional image of a London luxury-property transaction.

Regional Growth Outpaces London and the South East

These percentages describe changes in loan counts, not regional market shares or house-price growth. The combined figure for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland also does not establish that each nation experienced the same increase.

Savills links the broader growth to higher property prices and accumulated housing equity. The research describes completed lending, however, and should not be read as a measure of every household seeking a larger mortgage or being declined for one.

A Large Loan Does Not Always Mean a Large Fortune

The £500,000 threshold identifies the size of a liability. It does not, on its own, describe the borrower’s wealth, financial resilience or need for a particular type of lender.

A £500,000 mortgage could finance a £625,000 home at 80% loan to value. The same borrowing against a £1m property would represent 50% LTV. Those applicants have the same mortgage balance but very different equity positions.

Even then, the lower-LTV borrower is not automatically the easier case. They may have variable earnings, business commitments or a shorter intended mortgage term. The other household may have stable salaries and straightforward expenditure.

The practical question is how the proposed loan fits the household’s income, assets and plans. A large deposit can strengthen the property side of an application while leaving the income assessment unresolved.

That distinction becomes more relevant as substantial mortgages appear across a wider range of local markets. Buyers should not assume that their financing needs are unusual simply because they are purchasing outside London.

The Monthly Commitment Has Changed Too

Savills also reports that the annual cost of servicing a new £500,000 mortgage increased from £25,100 in August 2021 to £34,100 in August 2026, a rise of approximately 36%.

That is a £9,000 annual difference, equivalent to £750 a month. The accessible reports do not provide the full calculation assumptions, so these figures should be treated as Savills’ comparison, rather than a quotation or a payment estimate for every £500,000 loan.

For an individual household, the actual payment depends on the rate, term, repayment structure and fees. A mortgage balance that looks familiar can therefore represent a very different commitment from the one the borrower last arranged.

This matters particularly for people moving after several years in the same home. Their equity may have increased, but the borrowing needed for the next property can still require a substantial step up in monthly expenditure.

The purchase budget should account for that change alongside other commitments. School costs, pension contributions, support for relatives and business investment do not disappear because a lender is prepared to offer a larger mortgage.

A Cheshire Purchase Illustrates the Decisions Behind the Number

Consider a hypothetical business owner buying a £1.2m home in Cheshire. They plan to contribute £400,000 towards the price and borrow £800,000, equivalent to approximately 66.7% LTV.

The deposit is substantial, but several questions remain. How much of the owner’s income can the lender accept? Is it drawn as salary, dividends or another form of remuneration? Are the business accounts consistent with the income being presented?

The buyer also needs acquisition costs and a cash reserve beyond the £400,000 contribution. If the proposed deposit uses most of their accessible personal money, the purchase could leave little flexibility for unexpected expenditure.

Increasing the deposit would reduce borrowing, but might require selling investments or extracting additional company funds. Retaining more cash would increase the loan and its ongoing cost.

Those are financing and planning decisions, rather than consequences of the property’s postcode. They are best assessed before the buyer commits to a price that depends on an assumed mortgage figure.

Business Income Needs to Be Understood Before It Is Counted

For company directors, personal drawings may not capture the full picture of a profitable business. Equally, the company’s profits and cash are not automatically interchangeable with the director’s personal income or available deposit.

The relevant lender assessment needs to establish ownership, trading performance, the accounts being used and the sustainability of the income. A strong recent year may need explanation if it differs substantially from the preceding period.

Willow’s recent article on Barclays’ approach to qualifying company profits explored why the way income is assessed can matter to borrowing capacity. Any lender-specific route still needs to be checked against current criteria and the actual applicant.

The useful discussion with an accountant is therefore broader than obtaining a set of figures. It includes what the business needs to retain, whether distributions are sustainable and whether any proposed changes to remuneration make sense beyond the mortgage application.

A larger home loan should not be built on an income presentation that the business cannot continue to support.

Professional Households Can Face Different Questions

Now consider a hypothetical couple buying a £950,000 home in Edinburgh with a £300,000 contribution towards the price. Their proposed mortgage is £650,000, approximately 68.4% LTV.

The income might combine a fixed salary with partnership earnings, bonuses or commission. The total received in the last year is useful evidence, but it does not establish how much a particular lender will accept as sustainable income.

A bonus paid annually also creates a different household cash-flow pattern from a monthly salary. The borrower needs to understand how ordinary monthly spending and mortgage payments will be met between those payments.

If either person expects to reduce working hours, change role or take a career break, that belongs in the affordability discussion. An application based on today’s income can still produce a poor fit for plans already being made.

The property location shapes the transaction and available homes. The income structure and future commitments shape whether the proposed debt is appropriate.

Mortgage Size Alone Does Not Choose the Lender

A £500,000-plus requirement does not automatically mean a private bank or a specialist lender is needed. A suitable mainstream product may accommodate the loan and offer a competitive overall outcome.

Where income, assets or repayment requirements are less straightforward, other lending approaches may deserve consideration. The purpose is to find a suitable fit, rather than to choose a lender category because it sounds appropriate for a high-value purchase.

If a private-bank proposal involves moving investments or establishing a wider banking relationship, those requirements should be assessed alongside the mortgage. The interest rate is only one part of the arrangement.

Likewise, a specialist mortgage that accepts a particular income source needs to be compared on fees, term, repayment requirements and ongoing affordability. Greater flexibility in one area does not make every other feature suitable.

For the borrower, good advice should explain why the proposed route works and what alternatives were considered. It should also make clear where a simpler arrangement remains available.

More Available Borrowing Is Not the Same as a Better Plan

The deposit, loan amount and repayment structure need to be considered together. Borrowing less may reduce costs and improve resilience, while retaining cash can be important for family or business commitments.

Willow’s recent coverage of Coventry’s expanded interest-only criteria examined another part of that decision: how mortgage structure can change the capital committed to a purchase.

Interest-only borrowing does not remove the need to repay the principal. It also should not be treated as a way to avoid a lender’s affordability requirements. The borrower needs an appropriate repayment strategy and a clear understanding of the debt remaining outstanding.

A longer repayment term can reduce the monthly payment but may increase the total interest paid. A shorter term can reduce the duration of the debt while placing greater pressure on current cash flow.

The appropriate balance depends on the household’s circumstances. The maximum a lender will offer is a boundary to assess, rather than a target every buyer should try to reach.

The Implications Extend to Regional Professional Advisers

For accountants, financial planners and estate agents outside London, the research gives a reason to bring mortgage planning into conversations earlier.

An accountant may know that a client has retained profits but relatively modest personal drawings. A financial planner may know that a proposed deposit would disrupt a longer-term investment plan. An estate agent may see a buyer agree a purchase before the necessary borrowing has been properly assessed.

Connecting those facts early can help establish a realistic budget and identify where additional evidence or a different lender assessment is needed. It can also prevent a client making financial changes solely to fit an assumed mortgage requirement.

Existing owners with larger loans approaching renewal deserve the same attention. The original mortgage may have been appropriate when arranged, but income, family plans and available capital may have changed since then.

For Willow, the regional growth reinforces a straightforward principle: substantial borrowing needs to be understood wherever the property happens to be. The relevant expertise follows the client’s finances and objectives, not a London postcode.