I found a nice house with low energy efficiency, should I buy it?

gmgmgm

toja wrote: »

The owner said they pay fixed fee to British gas around £70 a month for gas + electricity.

The "energy rating" doesn't really have much relation to reality.

Assuming the vendors are honest, you're worrying about £70 per month on a property worth over 100K. Even if your costs are really double that, is it really worth worrying about??

When I was looking to buy my current house, I didn't find the energy graphs to have any use whatsoever.

toja

Hey smarties, I made an offer today at 148k which was turned down straight away. The owners want 155k. I would be ready to compromise to 152-153k but dont want to go back to agency and sound too desperate. I hope that the best option is to wait for few days and then say "ok I am ready to compromise a bit", but of course I am afraid that someone else will make a better offer until that. Or maybe I would not sound serious at all?

toja

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

Depends on the area, but that sounds like a very generous first offer.

Well as you can see from my post, less generous offer was turned down (as i expected, to be honest)

Really2

toja wrote: »

Hey smarties, I made an offer today at 148k which was turned down straight away. The owners want 155k. I would be ready to compromise to 152-153k but dont want to go back to agency and sound too desperate. I hope that the best option is to wait for few days and then say "ok I am ready to compromise a bit", but of course I am afraid that someone else will make a better offer until that. Or maybe I would not sound serious at all?

Don't worry it is safe to say there are not many of you on the market let them sweat untill tuesday at the earliest.

harryhound

I think everyone on this thread is underestimating the draconian laws that will have to be imposed because of the need to save carbon emissions.

If you live in one of these detached antique properties, I hope it is in the country and you can get away with wood fired heating.

Davesnave

harryhound wrote: »

I think everyone on this thread is underestimating the draconian laws that will have to be imposed because of the need to save carbon emissions.

If you live in one of these detached antique properties, I hope it is in the country and you can get away with wood fired heating.

But, conveniently, you're not telling us what these laws will be!

We're not talking 'antique' here; that's just emotive language. Millions of people live in relatively fuel inefficient homes with solid walls and that isn't going to change. Creating new homes to replace them wouldn't be carbon neutral either!

I don't deny that we need to reduce everyone's carbon footprint, but that will be achieved through pricing, and measures taken at a macro level with industry, rather than targeting Joe Bloggs, who happens to have chosen an Edwardian terraced house.

If you are really saying energy costs will increasingly punish owners of large, energy-inefficient houses, then I'm sure you're right, but that also applies to people who choose to drive large, fast cars, where again, millions still exist. Getting those off the streets will be a darn sight easier, but there is still much 'consumer resistance.'

A 2 bed maisonette is hardly the height of profligacy in this context.

harryhound

But, conveniently, you're not telling us what these laws will be!

The politicians are not telling you the truth, because if they did you would not vote for them.

I think something like 37% of the country's carbon footprint is down to its draughty inefficient buildings. It is farcical to impose ever increasingly high standards on new build while largely ignoring the difficult cases. I expect the choice to be a mixture of cladding the antique (over 100 years old) property and/or heating it by burning wood.

There is a nice new office block between "City Hall" and London Bridge station that is heated by wood chip. Apparently the exhaust smells a bit more than a balanced flue gas boiler.

Davesnave

It'll be interesting watching 'persuasion' at work, whether by price or edict. Personally, I think it is well under way, judging by what this energy-inefficient house I'm renting (temporarily) costs in winter weeks!

I'm not sure about cladding old properties that were designed to 'breathe.' People have been busy slapping modern waterproof finishes on these for the past 50 years or so, then wondering why they're damp!

At least where I'm planning to go, wood isn't in short supply.

lostinrates

Davesnave wrote: »

It'll be interesting watching 'persuasion' at work, whether by price or edict. Personally, I think it is well under way, judging by what this energy-inefficient house I'm renting (temporarily) costs in winter weeks!

I'm not sure about cladding old properties that were designed to 'breathe.' People have been busy slapping modern waterproof finishes on these for the past 50 years or so, then wondering why they're damp!

At least where I'm planning to go, wood isn't in short supply.

Yep, its a bit of an issue round here: lots of people dampproofed and replastered their weekend homes...only to find this has caused far bigger issues. There are sensible things you can do to imporve the efficiency of many old houses, but the build method and material of the house really do need to be considered.

Some of my neighbours still have the flag and brick over earth floors, and never have the damp problems their neighbours who had 'proper floors' put in have. TBF the earth lood houses all have ranges that I can think of too.

toja

Hi guys. I raised this topic and the outcome is that I agreed on 152k price and am starting the legal process. I've looked at other properties and did not like any or the ones I would like are far outside my budget, therefore I have decided on this one.