The old question sell then buy ?

Waterlily24

It would cost us too much to rent so wouldn't even consider it.

arbrighton

we rented as we were relocating for OH work and didn't want to spend every weekend househunting rather than seeing friends etc before we moved, with 6 hour minimum round trip.

Sale fell through as well so that was not a bad thing

That gave us time to look at different areas within commute distance and find a more interesting property- if we'd just wanted a standard, dull, brick box, that would have been easy.

By the time we'd found a new buyer, and they'd had a go at gazundering, we were ready to proceed with this place as cash buyers

Rental period and home completion overlapped a bit but that allowed us to at least freshen everywhere up with a lick of paint/ get damp patch sorted before we moved in

Davesnave

phoebe1989seb wrote: »

. We also didn't want to eat into our capital (cash buyers) by paying rent.......

It's fair to add that when we sold to rent, we were still getting 6.5% - 6.7% on most of our money, which meant we were making serious cash each month, over and above our rent etc.

Obviously, this situation no longer pertains!

ellie27

We sold, rented then bought.

It was not our plan to do so. Our sale fell through first of all, then it took several months to get a buyer so had to pull out of our purchase. When we did accept an offer on ours there was nothing that was 'almost perfect' for us. We didnt just want to buy an OK house.

We sold, went into a 12 month rental, but within 3.5 months made an offer on a house we loved and had our offer accepted.

We were lucky that our landlord allowed us to break from our lease early. We had a 6 wk overlap period where we had the rental and the new house.

We done this with a 3 yr old and a 4 yr old.

Totally worth it.

I guess you know what type of house would be your ideal. If they come up frequently then I would say you can sell/buy at same time.

However if there is nothing on at the moment and you are particular about where/what/garden/plot size...... then I think it would be best to sell and rent. It means you will be able to actually make a valid offer on a house that comes up that ticks all your boxes.

The worst position to be in, for me, would be you have your house up for sale, then your dream home comes up, but you have not accepted an offer on yours. In this case nobody would take you seriously if you were to view it.

Good luck

Phirefly

I'd sell-rent-buy every time. There was enormous competition for the house we're buying and the main reason our offer was accepted was because we are chain-free due to renting. We have been able to take our time in a highly sought after village to find the right property at the right price, and found out about private sales we'd never have been privy to were we living in our old house and trying to buy here from afar. The fact we have not had to worry about a sale has been blissful, we can be flexible on timeframes and not feel like we're under any pressure.

That was until we HAVE found ourselves in a position where we DO have to sell a property before we complete on our purchase (due to higher sdlt). As soon as that came to light, it became the most stressful, complicated process imaginable. And in direct comparison to how it felt prior to the other property being involved, I'd take buying while renting over buying while selling all day long.