Buy now (in Dundee) or wait?

economic

Crashy_Time wrote: »

I`m guessing structural damage costs a lot to fix, the flats are probably literally sinking into the ground. Depending on when people bought, and what their survey threw up insurance may or may not be an option, but I don`t really know, pretty sure insurance for that wouldn`t come cheap anyway?

Too many assumptions so you don't know the full story. Usually insurance shojld cover subsidence. Shojld not dissuade anyone from buying property - flat or house.

Crashy_Time

economic wrote: »

Too many assumptions so you don't know the full story. Usually insurance shojld cover subsidence. Shojld not dissuade anyone from buying property - flat or house.

So the likelihood that your dwelling could sink into the ground shouldn`t dissuade you from buying the property? Interesting advice. There were some houses in a street in Edinburgh a few years back that were literally sliding into the Water of Leith somewhere, quite plush neighbourhood (if you ignore the fact that a house half in a river is basically worthless) yet still there were sellers there kite flying for peak plus prices, they would love you.

glasgowdan

As a buyer it's easy to say no. Subsidence? I literally wouldn't live in a property with such problems even if it was free. You'd be mental to buy into that headache.

If you've the cash to buy a detach house then that, or a good semi, is the only way to go in my book. We've owned a flat and don't want anything to do with them for the rest of our lives.

economic

Crashy_Time wrote: »

So the likelihood that your dwelling could sink into the ground shouldn`t dissuade you from buying the property? Interesting advice. There were some houses in a street in Edinburgh a few years back that were literally sliding into the Water of Leith somewhere, quite plush neighbourhood (if you ignore the fact that a house half in a river is basically worthless) yet still there were sellers there kite flying for peak plus prices, they would love you.

you tend to take the worse possible situation and extrapolate it so that you are certain this outcome will happen for everything. how can you live like this? have you gone through life taking no risk what so ever?

you obviously don't buy a property that is not insured and that is likely to sink into the ground.

bitsandpieces

There's risks attached to any decision in my situation. Anywhere I buy will have the risk of something expensive going wrong (and, of course, if I don't buy prices and rents might shoot up). I'm holding back on a nice flat at a good price, because it's top floor and I know that collective repairs on a block can be a pain...especially if the water's coming through *my* ceiling!

Hopefully I'll find something with a favourable balance of risks that's also a nice place to live

dktreesea

economic wrote: »

Why 42k cost each? Why not claim under insurance like what usually happens?

Not always. The insurer may decide it is normal wear and tear. Nor do they have to pay up if the extent of the erosion to the foundation suggests negligence/delays to the repairs by the owners.


For the people across the road from us, there was no blocks of flats insurance -it's not compulsory up here. The insurer for one of the tenants successfully argued they weren't liable for the repairs because they were caused by subsidence/erosion under a neighbouring block and that the neighbouring stair had been aware of the erosion for two years but had not addressed it.


Even modern flats are not immune. One of our local housing associations has just hit its owners in one of it's blocks with a £2,500 repair and maintenance bill, over and above the monthly maintenance fee. It's a structural issue - their underground car park is below the water table in parts. The drainage isn't sufficient. The housing association should be claiming against their insurance company for the work but for some reason they either prefer not to or can't.

dktreesea

bitsandpieces wrote: »

There's risks attached to any decision in my situation. Anywhere I buy will have the risk of something expensive going wrong (and, of course, if I don't buy prices and rents might shoot up). I'm holding back on a nice flat at a good price, because it's top floor and I know that collective repairs on a block can be a pain...especially if the water's coming through *my* ceiling!

Hopefully I'll find something with a favourable balance of risks that's also a nice place to live

I've had this very experience, a leaking roof, in our rented flat. It was horrendous. To this day, nearly five years on, we still have problems with mould. The water that came through the ceilings was so sick. In the bathroom one of the walls swelled. So much for "solid". We had buckets everywhere. The lounge, the kitchen, the attic. It took them three days to get the scaffolding up. And that is super quick in this neck of the woods.


The owner had surveyors in to look at the mould and see if it could be fixed. Sure. The internal walls would have to be knocked out and rebuilt. No plasterboard. The mould is within the wall cavities. They were quoted thousands to get the job done. Oh, with one small problem - the work couldn't be guaranteed because it wouldn't be possible to determine the full extent of the mould.


On the bright side, it means they can't ask the full market price for the rent. Well, they haven't, because we could go to the council to insist on the repairs, because mould is an environmental health hazard. So I think they hope to let sleeping dogs lie.

bitsandpieces

I've had a similar experience in a rented top floor flat - but at least then someone else was paid for the scaffolding. 3 days for the scaffolding to go up does seem pretty good (was far longer for me), though I appreciate that would have seemed like a long time!

kilby_007

economic wrote: »

Too many assumptions so you don't know the full story. Usually insurance shojld cover subsidence. Shojld not dissuade anyone from buying property - flat or house.

That's a ridiculous statement. I've had the experience of almost buying a property with subsidence. It was caused by tree roots drying up the ground at the front of the property, and the current insurers had covered the installation of some helibars to hold the brickwork together beneath the window sills, but that didn't address the issue of the ground movement. The tree had a protection order on it and the council were digging their heels in about any action to cut the roots of the tree or remove it. You could see there had been a history of problems with it as one corner of the property was leaning over and had been repointed a number of times. I looked into insurance and it was sky high. The cheapest insurer's premium was about 3 times what it would cost for the same property without subsidence issues. This was about 5 months ago. We backed out of the sale and somebody else bought the property, at least 20%/£60K below market value. The discount wouldn't have been worth the constant worry, expense, and upkeep in my opinion with the high probability that further subsidence would occur and potential for one side of the house to eventually collapse completely.

ali-t

glasgowdan wrote: »

300k in Dundee could get you a mansion! With butler, maids and a stable full of horses.

How about middle ground, 200-220k, nice detach house, all the rooms you'll need and a stress free lifestyle?

EDIT: Wow, why hasn't this sold yet? http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-51714340.html

As lovely as the house is Strathmartine road is a very busy road, the houses are not set far off the road and the street seperates 2 housing schemes - one of them pretty rough.