This is somewhat redundant with the excellent posts above, but I'll weigh in anyway.
There is a common omitted variable bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding
) that causes people to believe that "CS degree implies high salary." Actually, "excellent programming skills implies high salary" and "applied computer science implies high salary". Good programmers are in demand regardless of credentials. And people with the aptitude, interest, and dedication to master conceptual CS (which is distinct from programming) are also in demand.
But there are all these statistics floating around that say that CS degrees are correlated with good employment outcomes. So people with no real interest or aptitude for CS sign up and try to coast, grade-grub, and cheat their way to a degree, thinking that the diploma is a golden ticket. It's not. It's the skills and knowledge, and willingness to do a lot of work with them, that are valuable in the job market. The coasters tend to flunk out, or barely graduate and then be unable to land a job. And frankly they were annoying to those of us that were sincerely interested in doing a deep dive into the material. I suspect the poor statistics in UK come from a glut of these sorts of graduates.
As a rule, the CS majors that excelled after college had a sincere interest in programming, or something else involving computational thinking, before college. That interest made it fun to put in many long hours cultivating hard-won skills. It's not a matter of stuff coming easily, but rather an inclination to excel at something that most people find boring and discouraging. This is where Meyers' 98% figure comes from. Personally, I was coding at 7 and had put in my 10,000 hours long before college.
Making code work involves getting something objectively wrong a few hundred times before it finally works. Code, test, wrong, fix; repeated dozens of times. Few people have the combination of humility, obsessiveness, and patience necessary to do that for hours on end. I think "teach to the test" and "everyone gets a medal" is making this worse. People have a thin skin about being told they're wrong, and can't handle a situation where there is no answer book and you just have to think harder until you solve the puzzle.
So, friend Olaz, I tend to think a CS major would not be a great fit for you. The fact that you don't have a history of intrinsic interest is a red flag. The fact that you took one CS course and disliked it is another. Your posting patterns make me think that you are a lateral thinker that likes to talk things out with other people; not someone who enjoys grinding away on a logic puzzle that no one else cares about solely for the satisfaction of eventually solving it on your own.
As others said, I'd caution against thinking in terms of proscribed "major -> job -> career -> salary" paths. That's an old economy, salary man, system that seems to be dying. Instead, figure out what your goals and distinct strengths are, and then choose whichever major (or other plan) advances those the best. That's more of a renaissance man approach, that I expect will be more robust in the globalized job market, and more personally satisfying.