Am I to become a renter

IveSeenTheLight

PasturesNew wrote: »

I wish I was.... I'm lower scum... I'm lodger class.

Now, now PN, we all have our choices.
You choose to remain in an area where you describe limited opportunities for employement.
You always have the option to move.

IveSeenTheLight

shortchanged wrote: »

I have to agree with you on this one chewie. I'm not convinced there is the big money making on self builds that there was from the previous decade.

This is not about making a profit, it's about value for money.
the property I'm considering building is 240 square meters.
A similar value property less than 10 miles away is only 156 square meters.

Were faced with the question, do we move into an already established property that means we don't need to rent and shouldn;t need to move again else do we rent for 10 months, have two moves but end up with 84 square meters more, a bigger garden and better views.

Percy1983

HOMEOWNING_FTW wrote: »

Guess he could always run off home to mummy to be bailed out and supported. No on second thoughts he's probably got more self-respect than to impose himself onto others.

If there is room with his parents or inlaws and is willing to pay a reasonable 'rent' then it could be an arrangement which benefits all involved.

As for renting is it possible to downsize or move to a cheaper area if its only short term?

Percy1983

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

This is not about making a profit, it's about value for money.
the property I'm considering building is 240 square meters.
A similar value property less than 10 miles away is only 156 square meters.

Were faced with the question, do we move into an already established property that means we don't need to rent and shouldn;t need to move again else do we rent for 10 months, have two moves but end up with 84 square meters more, a bigger garden and better views.

To be honest its sounds like the second is the better option, if you don't you will look back and think 'what if'.

With that I am not sure I even have 84 square meters and I am happy.

shortchanged_2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

This is not about making a profit, it's about value for money.
the property I'm considering building is 240 square meters.
A similar value property less than 10 miles away is only 156 square meters.

Were faced with the question, do we move into an already established property that means we don't need to rent and shouldn;t need to move again else do we rent for 10 months, have two moves but end up with 84 square meters more, a bigger garden and better views.

That's fine ISTL and if you are doing it for the right reasons then good luck.
.
All I was saying is that I'm not convinced as chewie states that the house will be immediately worth £120,000 more than what it cost you.

But if it's a house for life and not an investment who cares anyway.

wotsthat

shortchanged wrote: »

That's fine ISTL and if you are doing it for the right reasons then good luck.
.
All I was saying is that I'm not convinced as chewie states that the house will be immediately worth £120,000 more than what it cost you.

But if it's a house for life and not an investment who cares anyway.

Who put you in charge of deciding what the wrong and right reasons are for building a house?

If someone wants to build a house and hopes it'll be profitable do they go on your naughty list?

chewmylegoff

Percy1983 wrote: »

If there is room with his parents or inlaws and is willing to pay a reasonable 'rent' then it could be an arrangement which benefits all involved.

As for renting is it possible to downsize or move to a cheaper area if its only short term?

what if his parents were to use the rent to pay off their mortgage though? unethical, surely. after all they're not doing anything to earn the money.

shortchanged_2

wotsthat wrote: »

Who put you in charge of deciding what the wrong and right reasons are for building a house?

If someone wants to build a house and hopes it'll be profitable do they go on your naughty list?

Yes of course they do.

While I have no objections to people making a small gain on building, I would like to see the days of huge profits on self building long gone.

You're well aware of my feelings on this one wotsthat, in that I am firmly against property being seen as a cash cow and investment.

Houses should be exactly what they are, places to live and call home.

chucknorris

shortchanged wrote: »

Yes of course they do.

While I have no objections to people making a small gain on building, I would like to see the days of huge profits on self building long gone.

Don't forget with profit comes risk and at least some effort.

The profits are unlikely to ever be small because when you self build you eliminate the following costs:

2% stamp duty (based on the value that I would self build, see edit below)
2% sales/marketing costs (costs to the developer)
15% approx gross overheads and profit margin (of the developer)
?% potential access to cheaper finance (than the developer)
?% finamce costs between completion and disposal

The above is of course back of fag packet but represents the potential savings.

I'm not sure if ISTL has allowed for finance costs, even if he is using his own capital there would still be an opportunity cost. His notional profit is on the high side for what I would expect, but not quite outrageously so, if he happened to get good deals and didn't have to dip into a contingency fund for unusual events and risks.

Edit: just realised I would probably have to pay 3% stamp duty on the land, so the stamp duty saving wouldn't be 4%, overall it would only be about 1% plus 4% on the overall value less the land, so approx 2% overall (subsequently changed)

chucknorris

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

We also became aware of a plot of land about to become available at a very reasonable price which we could build our own home 84 sq meters larger than the property we offered on for the same price.


I'll keep you updated

Good luck I'm sure the prospect of self build is an exciting time for you.