Survey results: local authority development

marcg

boonerz wrote: »

Also, anothing thing that concerns me slightly is that on the valuation for the bank it say that the sales price is the maximum for mortgage purposes reflecting the standard of presentation which will need to be maintained. Does this mean we're paying over the odds, or is it just surveyor speak?

Was really excited but now having a few doubts. Would any of this be grounds to lower our offer?

The maximum price business means that the price being asked is the absolute maximum that the valuer thinks that house could be worth - there won't be any other houses on the street worth as much as that one and you aren't getting a good deal, just what the house is worth.

If I were you, I would be considering a few things:

1. If the market drops when you need to remortgage the house (not likely, but who knows in this recession) then you may have a problem getting a new mortgage to the same ratio. In other words, if you are maxing yourself out to buy this one (say a 90% mortgage on a £100k house) and the value drops to £90k in three years time when your discounted rate is up then you won't be able to get a mortgage for £90k (100% of the new value) and will be stuck on whatever variable rate the original mortgage defaults to after the deal is up. If your mortgage ratio is low because you are selling another house say, 50%, then this probably doesn't matter.

2. If the area is still partially local authority are there registered social landlords operating in the area? These are quango-type organisations which rent out to housing-list people; more chance of trouble. This is really a very conservative concern - more important is to spend time on the street on a Friday night from about 5pm till 9pm - who's coming home? Are there kids hanging round? Also, what condition are the neighbours houses in - people taking pride in their area make nicer areas!

3. There's a recession on - can you get a better deal here or elsewhere? Or do you really really love this house? If so you might be being very sensible - my first house cost me £20k in renovation which came out of my pocket, not and extra £20 a month on the mortgage - no fun at all, I can tell you: buying the perfect house in the perfect condition at the right price (not too expensive) is a very sensible decision. Your valuer doesn't think the house is over-priced so this might be a good thing for you.

I've just had a look at the house - looks nice. A house of that age isn't going to give you any problems technically so the concern is really going to be the ones listed above: if the market drops will you be ok? What are the neighbours like? How keen are you to get a good deal?

tek-monkey

boonerz wrote: »

Council estates have an obvious stigma, as I’m sure you’re aware.

If some are still owned by the council then tenants will tend to be from lower income groups. The assumptions people often make are then that these people will be more likely to be nightmare neighbours (not my opinion!) and take less pride in their property as they do not own it.

I don't understand why though. If the house was nice when you viewed, its the same house now regardless of it being ex council. You get plenty of nightmare neighbours in private lets too after all, I think I used to be one!

Mind you, I grew up on a council estate, so I suppose I don't understand the bias.

marcg

You are entitled to accommodation on a council housing list, no matter who you are. You need references to rent privately.

Not a guarantee by any means, but logic says which one I'd rather have near me.