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!
House development on old petrol station. Opinions?
Options
love2learn
Posts: 172 Forumite
We're about to buy a new build house, built on land previously used as a petrol station.
I've read the reports and planning documents on the councils website, there had been 20 tanks on the land, all of which were removed. Many tons of soil was removed and all levels of chemicals found to be well below residential development guidelines according to the report paid for and commissioned by the developer.
The postcode of the land was changed, not sure why possibly to make it harder for people to find the planning permission documents. Or maybe this is normal. I have no idea.
In years to come over the long term I will eventually sell the house, I'm wondering what perceived risk maybe like when selling. What's your opinion? Do you think that would put many people off buying it in the future?
I've read the reports and planning documents on the councils website, there had been 20 tanks on the land, all of which were removed. Many tons of soil was removed and all levels of chemicals found to be well below residential development guidelines according to the report paid for and commissioned by the developer.
The postcode of the land was changed, not sure why possibly to make it harder for people to find the planning permission documents. Or maybe this is normal. I have no idea.
In years to come over the long term I will eventually sell the house, I'm wondering what perceived risk maybe like when selling. What's your opinion? Do you think that would put many people off buying it in the future?
0
Comments
-
If it's all been decontaminated to comply with current levels of paranoia about such things then I suspect it shouldn't be a problem. Just keep the documents to hand in case anybody in the future wants to see them.0
-
If you're asking this question then future buyers will as well. Personally I wouldn't buy.Pants0
-
This.
If a future buyer had the choice of the OP's house and another which was identical in every other way, why would they choose the OP's?
Unfortunately this person would be an idiot.
the OP's house has had a raft of tests performed on it and the buyer KNOWS its up to a very high safe standard.
99.9% of houses don't have these test results so could be sitting on contaminated land.
but a lot people are idiots.0 -
It is certainly something that future purchasers will know about, the searches carried out for their conveyancing will show it.
As long as the paperwork is in order it wouldn't bother me.
It may affect the price a little.Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.0 -
martinsurrey wrote: »Unfortunately this person would be an idiot.
the OP's house has had a raft of tests performed on it and the buyer KNOWS its up to a very high safe standard.
99.9% of houses don't have these test results so could be sitting on contaminated land.
but a lot people are idiots.
Yeah my worry is a lot of people are idiots haha.0 -
This.
If a future buyer had the choice of the OP's house and another which was identical in every other way, why would they choose the OP's?
I agree with your thought process. However it's in the South East in a high demand area where house prices tend to grow at 5% - 6% per year and higher on average. Houses sell fast too. The competition is either other new builds (most of which are a bit smaller), and older houses, same size or smaller needing a lot of work usually. That's my thinking. May be I'm wrong.0 -
martinsurrey wrote: »Unfortunately this person would be an idiot.
the OP's house has had a raft of tests performed on it and the buyer KNOWS its up to a very high safe standard.
99.9% of houses don't have these test results so could be sitting on contaminated land.
but a lot people are idiots.
That's as may be, but does the OP care if they are selling to an idiot or not?
If there are a lot of idiots, so log as they can afford the OP's house, why exclude them from the pool of potential buyers.0 -
That's as may be, but does the OP care if they are selling to an idiot or not?
If there are a lot of idiots, so log as they can afford the OP's house, why exclude them from the pool of potential buyers.
I thin Martin meant idiots in the context that an idiot wouldnt consider the propertyNever, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards