News

Corporate lawyer, 27, on £72,000 a year saves just £600 a month

By on
101

Escaping the City to practise ‘fun law’ might not be as easy as you think

PIG

A top corporate lawyer on a hefty £72,000 salary has gone public with her spending diary, and she’s saving a hell of a lot less than you might think.

The anonymous international dispute resolution lawyer has revealed that she saves just £600 a month out of her £3184.20 take home income, which amounts to £7,200 a year.

So just how flash is this 27-year-old lawyer’s lifestyle to be saving so little?

Well, quite flash, but not that flash.

According to the London-based solicitor’s spending log, that appeared on lifestyle website Refinery 29, she does enjoy some luxuries. She has a cleaner (£72 a month) and a gym membership (£99 a month), plus she admits to spending over £164 on clothes and nearly £100 on food and drink a week.

That said, it’s not all spend, spend, spend.

There are certainly some more humble snippets from her diary. On the third day of her week-long journal, she spent less than £20, the whole whack on travel, KFC and Itsu. On day five, she spent just £8.80.

Money is a touchy subject, and Facebook commenters have displayed mixed feelings towards our £72,000 a year rookie and what she spends her income on. One person described her expenditure as “silly”, commenting:

[C]an’t believe she only saves £600 per month out of £3k+ when she has no kids.

Another, however, came out in defence of the dispute resolution specialist, pointing out that City lawyers do “ridiculously long hours”. She even argues:

If you divide her salary by the number of hours she spends in the office, her hourly wage would [be] about London minimum wage.

Whatever your views, this lawyer’s story goes some way to rebutting the idea that corporate solicitors have the luxury of saving big and quitting early to do ‘fun law’ (like media and crime) instead.

101 Comments

Anonymous

I have heard it suggested that city types might work for a few years and save enough to have a comfortable lifestyle while doing a job that pays less and is less demanding in terms of hours and stress. I have never heard it suggested that they save in order to quit and do “fun law”. What the hell does that mean? I don’t get it.

(59)(1)

Anonymous

yeah like ‘fun law’ (crime, other legal aid) is not undemanding in terms of hours and stress

(6)(0)

Anonymous

‘Whatever your views, this lawyer’s story goes some way to rebutting the commonly held view that corporate solicitors have the luxury of saving big and quitting early to do ‘fun law’ (like media and crime) instead’

Your definition of ‘some way’ must be very loose, lol.

(16)(1)

Anonymous

I’ve worked in the City for a number of years, and I’ve never heard of anyone moving into media and crime after doing corporate. Is this something Katie made up?

(45)(2)

Anonymous

“she saves just £600 a month out of her £3184.20 take home income, or £7,200 a year.”

For a salary of £7,200 a year I think she’s doing rather well saving £600 a month.

(95)(4)

Anonymous

That is how much she saves in the year!

(5)(27)

Anonymous

Thanks for the explanation, Katie. C at GCSE Maths, was it?

(34)(1)

Bun's Wife

No, A* actually.

(5)(3)

Fuggo

Thanks for this, Katie.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

600 x 12 = 7,200 saved per year…

(7)(0)

Anonymous

I think they were playing on the (hilarious) structural ambiguity in that sentence.

(22)(0)

Anonymous

Forgetting the big issue, or refusing to acknowledge the elephant in the room – tax! About time for a nice tax cut for the middle to upper earners.

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(27)(7)

Anonymous

If she earns £72k a year she would take home more than that! And who pays £99 a month for a gym membership?!

(39)(1)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(14)(5)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it was heavily upvoted and funny, and therefore against Legal Cheek’s comments policy that everything has to be sanitised

(36)(1)

Anonymous

That’s a pretty common price for a nice gym in central London.

(8)(8)

Do you even lift brah

Bullshit, that’s common for a soft-ass health spa.

If you’re just after pumping iron in the weights room and gettin swole on a budget, Pure Gym at St Paul’s is £33pm, 24/7 opening hours too.

(22)(7)

Anonymous

She could buy a decent bench, squat rack, barbell and dumbbells for £250, and get swole as fuark and never have to pay for a gym membership again #allkindsofgains

(22)(1)

Chestbrah

Fuark brah, tren hard and eat clen, get swole as a mudda!

(16)(0)

Tyrion

The above three are hysterical. Top bants chaps!

(13)(3)

PecLad

Anytime brah, want some tren? Hit a brudda up.

(6)(0)

Anonymous

£99 on a gym is quite common in central London. For instance virgin active in broadgate charges £134 pcm. I pay £55 but it’s a crappy crappy gym.

(5)(5)

Bun's Wife

If she earns £72,000 a year, the take home pay per month would be £4,102.

(5)(0)

Smug Crimster

Wow. That puts it in perspective.

I do crime and my take home is £3K but my gross is far far less than hers. That’s the higher rate tax bracket, I suppose.

I wouldn’t mind an extra £250 a week, but on balance I think I’ll stick to “fun” law, free evenings and weekends and the ability to live in a nice big house in the regions…

(9)(1)

Anonymous

Escaping the City to practise ‘fun law’ might not be as easy as you think

Katie really hasn’t the slightest clue what she’s talking about. What the fuck is “fun law”? Why does it only exist outside the city? Literally no-one in the city talks like this, you’ve just completely made it up.

(56)(0)

Stallone

Dude, she’s a two-bit grad who never made it in City Law so she churns out this shyte instead. What did you expect?

(33)(7)

Anonymous

Dude, you’re a two-bit big man wannabe calling yourself ‘Stallone’. I guess we can’t expect much from you. Keep plugging away on those TC apps, Sylv.

(6)(5)

Stallone

Lolz, I’m 2PQE in an MC firm. Good luck with bagging that TC though.

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(3)(5)

Bantz

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(0)

John King

In fairness, if you look at some ‘model’ budgets for personal spending, they advocate putting 20% of your take-home wage into savings. She’s not far off that. Speaking from experience, when you work for city centre law firms, the cost of accommodation, entertainment and expenses are generally are much higher than you might expect. Besides, at 27, you can still afford to rely on the magic of compound interest if you’re investing those savings. Let the lass enjoy it.

(9)(0)

Anonymous

Are you related to Katie?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

£99 gym membership is crazy as are the clothing and food expenses. Apart from that, it doesn’t look too off the wall.

(7)(1)

Anonymous

Even taking into account pension contributions and student loan deductions, why is their monthly take home income just less than £1,000 lower than it could be?

(2)(0)

Anonymous

“If you divide her salary by the number of hours she spends in the office, her hourly wage would [be] about London minimum wage.” <<< This is just a stupid excuse!

She has noone to blame but herself saving ONLY £600 a month! That's bad money management! She doesn't need a cleaner or at least the expensive type. Shes wasting money on gym membership that expensive. She could easily spend less on food!

She's just enjoying the luxuries of life. She shouldn't complain when she has no money for a deposit and struggles when a family/children begins

(8)(6)

Anonymous

Lol at anyone who has kids: enjoy getting financially destroyed for the privilege of waking up at 3 am every night for 5 years because your child has shat themself, then having loads of arguments with them once they’ve turned into a moody, spotty teenager, before you die alone in a nursing home when you’re old and your kids are too preoccupied with their own annoying kids to come and visit you. #neverhavingchildren

(21)(15)

Anonymous

How negative! Please do exit the gene pool…

(6)(8)

Anonymous

You want me to kill myself because I dint want to have children? You should have been aborted.

(4)(8)

Anonymous

Cretin

(2)(2)

Alphacock

Can’t handle the bantz, fggt?

(1)(0)

PecLad

Hear hear, my thoughts exactly.

(2)(0)

Legal Scrimper

Monthly Expenses:
Housing Costs: £950 (cut it down to £600 per month, c’mon)
Loan Payments: £126 (my car) (turn to the Boris bike)
Utilities: £52.81 (gas/electricity) + £5.08 (Sky) + £8.66 (BT Internet) (Sky? – what about Youtube?)
Council Tax: £76 (okay m8)
Cleaner: £72 (bloody ‘ell!)
Contact lenses: £18 (fairz)
Graze (snacks by mail): £3.89 (fuck off m8)
Netflix: £8.81 (and chill)
Gym membership: £99 (the City is my gym)

(16)(6)

Anonymous

£600?! Fine if you’d like to share a broom cupboard in a council block in Walthamstow.

(37)(4)

Lord Sprimpleton

I’ll have you know that I reign from Walthamstow; say no bad thing about the place! I have friends who live off Brick Lane for £650; sure, you might not want to be flat-sharing at 27, but in this economic climate, the scrimpers must save for a brighter future.

Lord Sprimpleton

(7)(3)

Anonymous

not true. you can get decent places for this price, you just have to look around a bit. take somewhere slightly less nice in a slightly less nice area, no place you rent is worth £900 per month.

(0)(15)

Anonymous

“cut it down to £600 per month, c’mon” – best joke I’ve heard in a long while.

(27)(3)

Anonymous

After tax she would have 49,227.20 a year or 946.68 a week so she is spending approximately 3200 a month after tax and then claims she does not have a flash lifestyle, I would question her spending habits.

(8)(1)

Trumpenkrieg

How empowering. She didn’t follow those Beyonce lyrics to a T in vain now did she?

(0)(1)

Anonymous

Its easy to blow £700 on coke and prostitutes.

(24)(2)

Anonymous

Fuark bruv, that’s what me and my mates go through on a solid Friday night out.

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(7)(2)

Anonymous

Funny thing is that this does happen…

(3)(0)

JonesDay 1PQE

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(3)(0)

PecLad

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(3)(2)

Anonymous

Oh hooray, another representative sample size. Sure the clothes figure is a lot, and I haven’t read the original article because pick any reason, but apart from that the spending isn’t that outrageous. The £100 pm gym membership is probably the same corporate one my firm offers, appalling branded ‘Virgin Active Collections’. London is expensive and £100 isn’t anywhere near the top end anyway.
£100 pw on food and drink is similarly not amazing. Have dinner and a night out in London and see how quickly you spend that much (quite quickly).
Maybe more good for her, she’s in a great, well paying job and enjoying what little free time she has before real life interferes, and less being envious of other people’s (a woman no less!) success.

(15)(1)

Anonymous

I read the original article a while ago and the clothing figure isn’t her average spend per week. She mentions that her local sports shop was having a closing down sale and the reason she spent so much is because she got some great deals and didn’t want to miss the opportunity. If that was what she usually spent, that would be excessive!

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Headline should read: Profligate fuckwit complains she saves far more a month than many legal aid lawyers earn.

(12)(5)

Anonymous

Did you even read the article? It does not say she is complaining.

(4)(1)

Anonymous

Complaining about only saving amounts which exceed some people’s earnings is a weird way to show fuckwitted profligacy.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

I’m sorry to break your bubble guys, but you will never become rich doing law (if that’s what you’re after).

(5)(5)

Anonymous

You’re so right – everyone knows those £2m+ partner cheques are fakeys

(7)(2)

Anonymous

Chances of becoming partner are slim to none though. Becoming partner in the MC is a completely different story when compared to 15-20 years ago.

(2)(2)

Anonymous

In the grand scheme of things 2m pa is peanuts

(1)(0)

Anonymous

In the grand scheme of things 2m pa is peanuts. 90% of city partners will never see that kind of money.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Unless you become an equity partner by the time you are 38-40 at a magic cirlce firm.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

Your life is so shit you want to buy luxuries to compensate. No real surprise. Most partners in big firms live from month to month

(4)(0)

Anonymous

£3,184.20 a month ?! Where on earth did you she get that figure from?

According to https://listentotaxman.com/72000? her net wage should be £4,102.23. Surely she’s not contributing £900 a month to pension?

(4)(0)

Anonymous

£600 isn’t that bad, she’s only 27!

I save £250 pcm on a 42K trainee salary and I thought that was decent…

(2)(4)

Anonymous

That’s crap savings mate!

(9)(1)

deleted

You should be able to save double that without too much hassle.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

I’m on £17k as a trainee and save £500-£600 PM

(5)(4)

Chestbrah

…and you live in some shytepit north of Sunderland.

(9)(4)

Anonymous

That means you earn £1,227.27 net a month.

So you’re either:
– talking shit; or
– live at home with your parents and do not pay food/living expenses.

(11)(2)

Anonymous

I live in a house share for £400 per month in lewisham and work weekends in a pub to top up. My point is If you really want to save you can. I have £200/£300 left over per month which If you budget you can easily live on. It’s a choice I’ve got friends on £30k who save nothing I want to buy a house and I’m saving for a deposit so scrimp and save my friends have no interest in that and enjoy spending their money.

(7)(5)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(5)(2)

Alphacock

£400 for a share in Lewisham? I didn’t know Biffa bins were that going for that cheap these days…

(3)(3)

Anonymous

Swap the swanky cocktails for a 4 pack of K Cider.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(0)

PecLad

K Cider’s the best blud

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(2)(0)

Just Anonymous

£3,184.20 take home pay seems suspiciously low for that gross salary.

According to Moneysavingexpert, her take home pay should be nearly £1,000 greater, at £4,102!

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/tax-calculator/

(5)(1)

Anonymous

Who cares how much she saves or claims to save. Everyone handles their finances differently. It’s crazy to propose the way she should or shouldn’t be spending. Go focus on your own habits.

(4)(0)

Anonymous

Who cares?

(2)(0)

Anonymous

I think they got the salary wrong.

£62,000 gross with student loan contributions and a 3% pension is £3,192 per month.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Honestly, looking at these comments I feel a bit bad for Katie.

(0)(11)

Bantah Lad

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(2)(2)

Anonymous

This comment will be deleted in 3…2…1….

(1)(0)

Anonymous

I’m not Alex, but nice straw man argument.

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(1)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(2)

Alphacock

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(0)

Fuggo

So much butthurt.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

ridiculous, she should be saving a lot more. also i read the original article and she’s obsessed with eating healthily and going to the gym. mate calm down, stay in bed and eat some chips. i’ve saved higher proportions of my income on much lower wages than her.

to be fair, the yearly savings figure doesn’t include bonuses.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

You do realise that she could be spending something like £1500 per month on rent alone ? Not uncommon

(6)(1)

Anonymous

“If you factor in hours she’s on roughly minimum wage”. No, she’s really not.

£72k a year is roughly £1384 per week (pre tax obviously). If she worked literally every hour of every week she’d be on £8.24 per hour.

(2)(0)

Ktc

Frankly with London rents so high I’m amazed she saves that much out of just 3k…you don’t get a one bed flat in an OK area for <2k

(2)(5)

Anonymous

What are you on about? There’s many perfectly decent flats in livable areas for ~1500/month.

(1)(0)

Lord Lyle of Distinction

Appalling tittle tattle made up twaddle, with gross invective from interjecting chavs.
LC. You shan’t have any lawyers left on this site at this rate.

There are law students that need some pertinent guidance rather than gossiping about what some one does with their own money, as if it’s anyone else’s business.

I’m out for a boc. Dunno if I can stomach anymore of this bile

(1)(1)

Zyzz

Can’t stomach the bantz, beta?

(1)(0)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(1)

Zyzz

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Its her dolls, she can do whatever the fuck she wants with it.

This is simply a Friday slow news day ‘article’

Don’t fall for the bait

(5)(0)

Anonymous

“plus she admits to spending over £164 on clothes and nearly £100 on food and drink a week.”

£164 x 52 weeks a year = £8,528.00 a year. With such long hours when does she wear these items to the point where she needs to replace an outfit a week?

She can double her saving by wearing her clothes more than once.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

She should use her dollar to buy chrismd merchandise

(1)(0)

Comments are closed.