North-South divide: The most and least expensive towns in Britain revealed

Median property values stand at £73,900, requiring slightly more than twelve months of earnings for a typical dual-income household.

At the other extreme, Beaconsfield in Buckinghamshire records average prices exceeding £1.1million.

This equates to more than fifteen times the average household income and highlights the extent of the disparities facing buyers across the UK.

Zoopla’s study assessed postal towns with at least 5,000 homes and calculated affordability based on house price-to-earnings ratios.

Nationally, a dual-earner household requires 4.4 times its combined annual income to purchase a home, a slight improvement on last year’s 4.5 ratio.

Scotland dominates the list of Britain’s ten most affordable towns, securing seven places in the rankings.

The remaining three positions are held by locations in North East England, underscoring a strong concentration of accessible property markets in the northern regions.

Cumnock in East Ayrshire ranks second with an average property price of £83,700.

Other prominent Scottish entries include Saltcoats, Ardrossan, Irvine and Kilwinning in North Ayrshire, while Girvan and Clydebank also feature among the most affordable markets.

North East England’s representation includes Peterlee and Ferryhill alongside top-ranked Shildon.

This regional pattern contrasts with the complete absence of southern England from the affordability list, reinforcing what Zoopla describes as "a significant geographical divide in housing value for home buyers".

The South East dominates the list of Britain’s least affordable areas, claiming eight of the ten highest-cost towns.

Gerrards Cross and Esher join Beaconsfield at the top of the rankings, with affordability ratios of 13.41 and 13.08 times average earnings respectively.

These commuter towns command substantial premiums that outstrip even London’s costliest boroughs.

Locations such as Radlett, Cobham and Ashtead all require more than eleven times typical household income, reflecting intense demand for rural-style living within reach of the capital.

Amersham, Marlow and Great Missenden also appear among the least affordable places, each demanding more than ten times annual earnings.

Zoopla notes that proximity to London combined with limited housing supply helps drive these exceptionally high ratios.

Tower Hamlets is the most affordable London borough, with average property values costing 4.97 times typical household income.

Zoopla attributes this to higher local salaries and the predominance of flats, making the area relatively accessible despite remaining four times more expensive than Shildon.

Southwark and Lambeth also record lower affordability ratios than many inner London areas.

These boroughs benefit from above-average wages and extensive apartment stock, bringing their price-to-earnings figures closer to outer London levels.

Croydon, Greenwich and Lewisham follow in the capital’s rankings with ratios between 5.48 and 5.59.

However, even the most accessible London locations remain significantly less affordable than the cheapest markets in Scotland and the North East, where homes cost little more than one year's household income.

Regional divides persist even in areas regarded as comparatively affordable.

Dover in the South East and Cinderford in the South West are the most accessible towns in their regions, yet both still require more than 3.5 times household earnings, posing challenges for single-income buyers.

Richard Donnell, Zoopla's executive director, said: "Our latest Affordable Towns research clearly highlights the wide gulf in the affordability of housing for home buyers across the UK and within regions."

Mr Donnell noted that while Scotland and the North East offer better value, clusters of unaffordable locations remain even in those areas.

"The days of most people moving within 5 miles of where they live are over."

He said the data shows buyers increasingly widening their search areas in order to find better value homes.