Low offer - below 2005 sold price

keith969

I'd think very carefully about why you want the extra land. For the £50k extra you'd spend, plus the money for updating the house, you would need a pretty good reason. The last house i had was in somewhere between half and one acre, and it required a lot of maintenance, and that took up a lot of time.

Slinky

Personally I don't understand a lot of buyers obsessions with having 'land' as opposed to a garden. If you're keeping animals on it or planning on living The Good Life I can see why you might want it, but the reality is that it can be flipping hard work, especially if your land has clay soil.

Is this 'land' going to turn into a scruffy wilderness, or a millstone around your neck you devote your life to maintaining?

KRB2725

If I could afford it, I would pay an extra 5k for the house I really wanted. I would never choose the compromise house unless I had to.

If you are intending to live there for several years, the work can be done as and when you can afford it.

AdrianC

Slinky wrote: »

Personally I don't understand a lot of buyers obsessions with having 'land' as opposed to a garden.

Simple. Other people can't build on it.

student100

We would like a big garden (we currently have an allotment which we will have to give up when we move). Admittedly this garden is bigger than we need, and is currently rather overgrown. It does back on to woodland and a stream though (don't worry it's downhill) which could be very picturesque. The garden in the cheaper house is average/fair sized but a little smaller thank we'd like.

The more expensive house has other flaws (as well as the work that needs doing) for example it has an enormous living room and master bedroom but the the other three bedrooms are a touch on the small side. The cheaper house has four bedrooms of a more even size plus an extra box room. The more expensive house has a kitchen on the small side and separate large dining room, whereas the cheaper house has a kitchen/diner which is a more flexible space. The garage in the expensive house is large but has restricted head height in most parts, whereas the single garage on the cheaper house is taller and could maybe be used as a gym space.

So yes lots of trade offs. The more expensive house is by no means perfect, but we can imagine how it could become perfect given sufficient time and money, but we don't have an unlimited about of money to throw at it! Also there's a risk that it turns out to have some other structural issues that we didn't see on our viewings, and it doesn't seem like the vendor is likely to negotiate a discount after survey.

student100

AdrianC wrote: »

Simple. Other people can't build on it.

In this case they probably can't. The land is sloping with a stream at the bottom of the hill and access would be very restricted down the side of the existing house. A planning application to build on the land in 1997 was rejected.