London ranked among the worst places for value for money

The UK’s most and least affordable places to live have been revealed, with London continuing to be among the least.

In a ranking created by The Telegraph, the analysis found that areas around Barrow-in-Furness offer the best value for money in the UK.

While at the other end of the list, London was among the worst value-for-money areas.

The analysis was carried out by Telegraph Money by comparing national data on average house prices, average earnings, food, commuting costs and energy bills.

Explaining what ‘worst value for money areas’ mean, The Telegraph shares: “At the other end of the spectrum are the areas where salaries are stretched furthest.

“While these areas typically offer higher wages, you are not necessarily better off once rent, bills and expenses are taken into account.”

Explaining why London made the list, The Telegraph wrote: “Centre for Cities’ recent Cities Outlook revealed that Londoners are paid 33pc higher than the national average salary.

“But it will come as no surprise that living in the capital is bad value for money, with high house prices, energy costs and expensive public transport.”

Although not surprising that London is at the bottom, it might be surprising that Penzance in Cornwall was named the worst value for money.

In the UK ranking, London ranked 158, with the average earnings at £38,364 and the average house price at £606,246.

The research also found that daily expenses in the North of England are considerably cheaper than in London and the South East.

In the North East, a typical shop is £50.30 a week, whereas in the South East, a shop is £64.90.