We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
No Boiler - Uninhabitable?
Mozzanov
Posts: 188 Forumite
A house came on the market a few days ago that seemed to tick quite a few of the boxes, but the most worrying was the fact it doesn't have a boiler (I saw from a previous rental listing it had one, but the EPC for sale shows it doesn't). I called the EA to get some information about it and they confirmed it doesn't have one. All I could learn was that the vendor has taken it and an attempt to speak further was met with an insinuation I'm a time waster (I tried to ask if they knew why it was taken and the type), they wouldn't answer my questions and claimed the price reflects the fact it has no boiler, that they have already had a lot of viewers and offers (their first words were - "we've just listed it today"!). At that point, I politely terminated the call (with "thanks for your time").
The vendor overpaid in 2007 (at least in my view as similar properties - small 2 bedroom semi-detached - in that area are now selling for 40k less than they were). It waas since rented it out for six months and before being listed for sale (so the story seems going by Zoopla). Aside from a nice (according to the photos) kitchen and bathroom, the rest of the rooms are looking a bit tired and in need of some rewiring in at least three rooms. I'm not sure what's going on in the living room, maybe an attempt at hiding cables above the fireplace, but looks like the wall is in a mess and needs more work than a bit of filler.
The last property to sell had a much bigger garden and driveway. It also had a boiler. It sold for the same price (described as a "Bellway Conditional part exchange"). And the only other one from 2012 sold for £5000 more (but again had a boiler and was better condition internally).
I might pursue it further, as I like the property (and see the potential, needs redecorating but the kitchen and bathroom seemed fine and are - allegedly - recently installed).
My concerns though are would a lender consider the house uninhabitable and not be willing to offer a mortgage? In terms of value, the lender's valuer might see it as quite a bit lower due to the lack of boiler?
The vendor overpaid in 2007 (at least in my view as similar properties - small 2 bedroom semi-detached - in that area are now selling for 40k less than they were). It waas since rented it out for six months and before being listed for sale (so the story seems going by Zoopla). Aside from a nice (according to the photos) kitchen and bathroom, the rest of the rooms are looking a bit tired and in need of some rewiring in at least three rooms. I'm not sure what's going on in the living room, maybe an attempt at hiding cables above the fireplace, but looks like the wall is in a mess and needs more work than a bit of filler.
The last property to sell had a much bigger garden and driveway. It also had a boiler. It sold for the same price (described as a "Bellway Conditional part exchange"). And the only other one from 2012 sold for £5000 more (but again had a boiler and was better condition internally).
I might pursue it further, as I like the property (and see the potential, needs redecorating but the kitchen and bathroom seemed fine and are - allegedly - recently installed).
My concerns though are would a lender consider the house uninhabitable and not be willing to offer a mortgage? In terms of value, the lender's valuer might see it as quite a bit lower due to the lack of boiler?
0
Comments
-
Does it have a central heating system and the boiler just doesn't work or is it the case that it doesn't have central heating?
If there is no central heating system how is the property heated? Electric storage heaters maybe? Or even coal fires if its not in a smokeless zone?
I'm no expert on mortgages but when you asked if a house without a boiler is uninhabitable you made me laugh. I had a very happy upbringing in a house with no central heating (rural area, heated with coal fires). And while I'm comfortably middle aged I'm not that old.0 -
A house came on the market a few days ago that seemed to tick quite a few of the boxes, but the most worrying was the fact it doesn't have a boiler (I saw from a previous rental listing it had one, but the EPC for sale shows it doesn't). I called the EA to get some information about it and they confirmed it doesn't have one. All I could learn was that the vendor has taken it
A house without a boiler can be inhabited by anyone who chooses to use portable heaters, and, if there's no hot water tank, boils water for washing in a kettle or on a stove.
This seems to be confirmed by other sources, which suggest that 'habitable' means 'having a working bathroom with WC, and a working kitchen'.0 -
Money_Bunny wrote: »Does it have a central heating system and the boiler just doesn't work or is it the case that it doesn't have central heating?
As I wrote already, the boiler was removed by the vendor.Money_Bunny wrote: »If there is no central heating system how is the property heated? Electric storage heaters maybe? Or even coal fires if its not in a smokeless zone?
There are radiators. There are pipes to carry the hot water to them. There are pipes to carry hot water to the hot water taps. As I mentioned before - the boiler was removed, the previous rental listing states clearly it is a gas central heating property.Money_Bunny wrote: »I'm no expert on mortgages but when you asked if a house without a boiler is uninhabitable you made me laugh. I had a very happy upbringing in a house with no central heating (rural area, heated with coal fires). And while I'm comfortably middle aged I'm not that old.
Glad to have made you laugh (and thanks for making me laugh too).
When it comes to a rental, a property with a broken, condemned or removed boiler can be considered uninhabitable. I don't know if this is the same for a mortgage, aside from the fact I do know that they can only be offered on properties considered habitable (it does have a kitchen, bathroom and running cold water). Hence my question. If it had some other source of heating, then I wouldn't ask.0 -
A house without a boiler can be inhabited by anyone who chooses to use portable heaters, and, if there's no hot water tank, boils water for washing in a kettle or on a stove.
This seems to be confirmed by other sources, which suggest that 'habitable' means 'having a working bathroom with WC, and a working kitchen'.
Sure, I have inhabited one with a broken boiler before for a week during the winter. I've also inhabited properties in two other countries without running water and/or any hot water. So, I know it is possible and how to manage with it.
My question is regarding what a lender's view point might be on it. They will lend money only if they think they can get a return if they repossess it and have to sell it. I would have at least thought this would change the value (as it stands), from their view. Who knows why the boiler was removed or what problems can be found when installing a new one. They might also consider that.
I noticed there are some experienced people on here and thought possibly someone would have insight into it from a lender's perspective.0 -
Call a couple of lenders.0
-
Sure, I have inhabited one with a broken boiler before for a week during the winter. I've also inhabited properties in two other countries without running water and/or any hot water. So, I know it is possible and how to manage with it.
I noticed there are some experienced people on here and thought possibly someone would have insight into it from a lender's perspective.
if you only want responses from posters with specific expertise, and you're going to take the hump at any lay person's response that restates what you seem to already know, then it would help if you state as such in your OP ...0 -
if you only want responses from posters with specific expertise, and you're going to take the hump at any lay person's response that restates what you seem to already know, then it would help if you state as such in your OP ...
No offence was intended, but in my OP I did ask about it from a lender's point of view:My concerns though are would a lender consider the house uninhabitable and not be willing to offer a mortgage? In terms of value, the lender's valuer might see it as quite a bit lower due to the lack of boiler?
Anyway, I have all the answer I need from ILW. It was stupid of me not to think about that before.0 -
Suggest you view the property in person to ascertain the amount of remedial work required.
Otherwise the topic is very subjective.0 -
A house without a boiler can be inhabited by anyone who chooses to use portable heaters, and, if there's no hot water tank, boils water for washing in a kettle or on a stove.
This seems to be confirmed by other sources, which suggest that 'habitable' means 'having a working bathroom with WC, and a working kitchen'.
Whilst its perfectly true that someone could make do temporarily living (after a fashion) in the house whilst they waited to have a new boiler installed, I would say that the law (and certainly commonsense) would define "working kitchen" and "working bathroom" as meaning hot water comes out of the hot taps. For hot water to come out of the hot taps, then there has to be a boiler to make that happen.
I would tend to take it as the house is indeed unmortgageable until a new boiler has been put in, so that that kitchen and bathroom both "work". I would certainly also start querying just why the vendor has taken the boiler - as in what game is he playing at to do that?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.9K Spending & Discounts
- 244.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.2K Life & Family
- 258.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards