Action on Rabbit Hutches?

fluffymuffy

I've been hoping for a requirement to label the square meterage on house sales. It will save so much time when looking at which houses to view.

After the war there was a shortage of timber and so new private houses were restricted in floor area to 1000 square feet (don't know when this ended - certainly still going in in the early 50s). 1000 square feet led to some crazy floor plans where space which could be used was boxed in to pass the requirement. Plenty big enough for a family of four though. That's 93 square metres.

We've got 120 square metres now. I wouldn't want to move anywhere smaller.

PasturesNew

Part of the problem is the crazy way houses are priced in the UK.

If I buy a 2 bedroom house for £100k and manage to split one of the bedrooms into two making it a 3 bedroom house, in a flat market it's likely any estate agent would put it on the market for £140k.

Houses should be marketed on size, so it's in your face and you can spot the tiny chancers.

OffGridLiving

PasturesNew wrote: »

Part of the problem is the crazy way houses are priced in the UK.

If I buy a 2 bedroom house for £100k and manage to split one of the bedrooms into two making it a 3 bedroom house, in a flat market it's likely any estate agent would put it on the market for £140k.

Houses should be marketed on size, so it's in your face and you can spot the tiny chancers.

Do we really need more nannying by the state bringing in regulations? If someone can't look at a room and figure out whether it's large or small, then perhaps they shouldn't be buying a house in the first place.

ukcarper

The thing is people are prepared to pay the price premium for a new home. In the area of the first house I posted it is possible to buy a secondhand house for 10 to 20% less. The availability of finance might be a factor but before the credit crunch around me people were more than willing to pay the same for a new 3 bed semi when they could have bought a larger 3 bed detached for same price.


Graham any comment on the house in Liskeark

chucknorris

I think I have solved the 'rabbit hutch problem' after days of analysis and strategy forming sessions I have listed the methods one should adopt to solve this problem below:

1. Don't buy a house that is too small for you.

CLAPTON

One can just image the 'fun' that civil servants could have.

Workshops / away days to determine how you 'measure' the size of a property.

Do built in wardrobes count?
Recesses, bay windows, spiral staircases, under eves areas
Do bathroom / kitchen count?

Then we would need a 'regulator' to arbitrate where there is dispute.

And of course how high should the fines be for providing false info?

CLAPTON

chucknorris wrote: »

I think I have solved the 'rabbit hutch problem' after days of analysis and strategy forming sessions I have listed the methods one should adopt to solve this problem below:

1. Don't buy a house that is too small for you.

Gosh now you have spoilt it all.

I was hoping to apply for the job of housing size regulator

OffGridLiving

chucknorris wrote: »

I think I have solved the 'rabbit hutch problem' after days of analysis and strategy forming sessions I have listed the methods one should adopt to solve this problem below:

1. Don't buy a house that is too small for you.

Blimmin' 'eck chuck!

You must have been number crunching for days with a Cray supercomputer to have reached that conclusion! Spare a thought for the poor 'depressives' on here who don't have access to that sort of high end computing. They'll never be able to figure it out!

N1AK

chucknorris wrote: »

I think I have solved the 'rabbit hutch problem' after days of analysis and strategy forming sessions I have listed the methods one should adopt to solve this problem below:

1. Don't buy a house that is too small for you.

Wow. All that effort and you still managed to come up with nothing useful or insightful

You may as well just go the whole hog and say "if you don't like the houses here then why not move to North Korea!?!?!".

chucky

chucknorris wrote: »

I think I have solved the 'rabbit hutch problem' after days of analysis and strategy forming sessions I have listed the methods one should adopt to solve this problem below:

1. Don't buy a house that is too small for you.

That doesn't make sense Chuck.

I should be entitled to buy the house that I want, in the area that I want, with every room being extra large and a front and back garden. It doesn't matter what I earn, house prices are too high. They should drop so I can afford them.