selling old house

jandrew

I'd like to sell my old, past it's prime, house for modern one. Is it worth spending money on renovations to try to get top price, or best to let it go for what I can get and put the money towards the new one?

3 possibilities are getting the the driveway re-paved, the ageing windows changed, or the building re-painted. Is any of these likely to have most bang-for-buck in appealing to buyers?

I'm not great at DIY so need to hire someone for anything major. My concern is most of the price goes into their pocket rather than value on the house.

MoominMama

My Victorian house is in a right state, needs new windows, decorating, damp sorting, it has no carpets and the floorboards haven't been varnished or anything, every EA that came to view it said don't do anything to it, sell it as it is because people would prefer a lower priced house that they can do up to their tastes rather than an expensive one done up to MY tastes and people always decorate their new home anyway, they said the amount of money it would add to the value would be less than it would cost to do.

As it is I got a buyer who was more than happy to buy it and do it up.

Davesnave

The frontage is the most important feature as regards getting attention, after the price!

Go out, take a few pictures and see what it looks like at the sort of resolution Rightmove uses. Cheap stuff, like a few planters with flowers can make a difference, as can a tidy setting.

Tarting-up is fine, but unless you are going the whole hog don't waste money on major items, like windows, if the existing ones are serviceable.

The person who sold me this house spent serious £££ replacing all the windows, which was very nice of her, but it needs far more than that. As a result, I didn't factor them into the overall renovation equation, and in fact half of them are being scrapped anyway.

System

get n estate agent to do a free valuation you may find it isnt worth doing anything.

bouicca21

As someone looking to buy and a bit of a rightmove junkie, I can confirm that drives and windows are what I look at (after checking the dpc and roof). But they are often recently done and totally hideous. Leave them alone!

A fresh lick of paint is a different matter - don't overdo it, keep it neutral (recently totally put off a house by price that factored in beautifully done decor - beautifully done but not beautiful, if you see what I mean).

TBagpuss

I'd second the suggestion to get a couple of agents in,. Ask them about asking price and eventual sale price now, or if you were to do each of those things, and get a couple of quotes of the work, then decide.

It also depends on how quickly you want to sell - repainting the doors and woodwork will give more 'kerb appeal' but will (almost certainly) not add anything to price, so may be worth doing if you're keen to sell quickly.

There are also fairly cheap steps you can take like adding some hanging baskets or planters, repainting the hallway if it needs it and so on.

The type of property you have and the type of buyer who is most likely to be interested may also make a difference - I think many people, certainly FTBs, families moving to a bigger property etc are likely to prefer to move in and then save up to make improvements or changes, rather than paying more upfront.

My own personal view:

Changing the windows - depends how bad they are - if they are bad enough that you have obvious damp or mould problems it's different to them simply being old and a bit tatty.

Driveway - weed and clean but don't replace.

I'm currently selling my house. I'm well aware that the bathroom is overdue for updating and that the boiler should be replaced and the central heatign upgrading. All the agents I spoke to told me that it was more or less cost neutral for those things on my particular property (assuming the quote I had for the work were accurate) and I decided to go for selling it as is, and that is reflected in the price.

My house is in a long street of identical properties and interestingly, there is one which has new kitchen and bathroom and has up to date heating, and which is priced accordingly. it's been on since May and hasn't sold. I accepted an offer on mine within 3 weeks of putting it on the market. (property is a 2 bed terrace so likely buyer are first time buyers and by to let landlords - it may be different with different types of buyer)

Mojisola

jandrew wrote: »

I'd like to sell my old, past it's prime, house for modern one. Is it worth spending money on renovations to try to get top price, or best to let it go for what I can get and put the money towards the new one?

3 possibilities are getting the the driveway re-paved, the ageing windows changed, or the building re-painted. Is any of these likely to have most bang-for-buck in appealing to buyers?

I'm not great at DIY so need to hire someone for anything major. My concern is most of the price goes into their pocket rather than value on the house.

I've just sold an older house which still had the original 60's kitchen and traditional layout. All the EAs said the same thing - any major changes you make will be your choice and may not be what the buyer wants so price it as a doer-upper and let the new owners change it to their taste.

Judging by the viewers I had, their advice was spot-on. One talked about making everything open plan, another would have made the kitchen much bigger with an extension, several talked about conservatories but sited in different places. The buyers actually love the "60's kitsch" and may be keeping much of the house as it is!

The look of the outside can put people off completely so follow Davesnave's advice about taking some photos and seeing how the house looks.

We took our photos of the inside and out and got some people who didn't know the house to give their opinion. When you are familiar with a place, it's surprising how much you don't actually "see" it any longer. A fresh eye can point out things that you wouldn't notice but that might make a viewer on Zoopla or Rightmove pass over your house.

TBagpuss

another point - when you get the photos done by the agents, I'd recommend that you let them take photos of all the rooms, even those that wren;t in a good state.

I've viewed a couple of properties where they had clearly 'cherry picked' and the photos showed only the rooms that had been done up. The over all impression was of properties in good condition and with OK decor (and the price reflected that) . Got there to find that the other rooms were really bad (peeling wallpaper, threadbare carpets etc) It made me feel, as a potential buyer, that I'd been misled and definitely put me off the property, whereas if I'd known from the start I might still have chosen to view (albeit ion the basis that there would clearly need to be a lot of negotiation on price)

When I discussed this with my agents when they were doing the particulars his view was that it generally better to let people have a realistic idea of what the house is like for that very reason (plus it cuts down on wasted time.

Ivana_Tinkle

The problem is that agents will always tell you not to do anything. They'd much rather have the house on their books now than have the possibility of getting it in six months' time when you've done the work, so they're not the best people to ask.

For what it's worth, I agree that "kerb appeal" is all and that making that first photo on Rightmove look appealing is v important in getting people through the door. Other than that, as Dave says, there's little point in doing one or two jobs unless you're going to go the whole hog and make it a perfect showhome.

Mojisola

TBagpuss wrote: »

I've viewed a couple of properties where they had clearly 'cherry picked' and the photos showed only the rooms that had been done up. The over all impression was of properties in good condition and with OK decor (and the price reflected that) . Got there to find that the other rooms were really bad (peeling wallpaper, threadbare carpets etc) It made me feel, as a potential buyer, that I'd been misled and definitely put me off the property, whereas if I'd known from the start I might still have chosen to view (albeit ion the basis that there would clearly need to be a lot of negotiation on price)

I don't even consider the houses which only show a few rooms. Why wouldn't the EA put on pictures of them all unless there was something to hide?

I also think it's weird when the first picture is of something like the bathroom - again, it feels as if the EA is trying to distract the viewers from other rooms.

moneyistooshorttomention

Mojisola wrote: »

I don't even consider the houses which only show a few rooms. Why wouldn't the EA put on pictures of them all unless there was something to hide?

That's not necessarily the case. My "new" house didn't have photos of some of the rooms. Cue for me thinking "Bet the bathroom has an avocado bathroom suite then" for instance. I got to the house and found that, in actual fact, it's basically a good sturdy house, but old-fashioned and badly presented. I'd have made a much better job of presenting it than the vendor did in the event...but I was being grateful that it WAS being so badly-presented (as that meant a lot of people would overlook it).

People are already obviously noticing the "plus"sides of it that were just totally not mentioned in the EA details or photos and can see what I see about it.