Thoughts on Flats vs Houses

IAMIAM

Is it purely down to price and location OR which do you prefer? 
Curious to the reasons not to buy an apartment even though majority of the time they seem much more expensive....

Robin9

Flats don't have stairs !   Don't jest but that's a serious consideration for some of us.  

Stubod

I suppose it comes down to location and value for money. Personally I would always buy a (detached) house over an apartment, (obscene ground rent/service charge that you have no real control over)....but that's just me...

Slithery

I'd take freehold over leasehold every time.

IAMIAM

Stubod said:

I suppose it comes down to location and value for money. Personally I would always buy a (detached) house over an apartment, (obscene ground rent/service charge that you have no real control over)....but that's just me...

I totally get this. I do understand how this coupled with various other negatives still leaves some standard 2 bed apartments literally 50% more expensive than a house down the road on right move.

comeandgo

Have never seen a flat I would like to live in, detached house in the country please.

blue_max_3

I'd feel cramped in a shoebox.
This is more my style... https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-70757824.html?backListLink=/property-for-sale/Nawton.html&onetime_savedPropertyId=70757824#summary70757824

hazyjo

Location first.

Would always choose freehold over leasehold, but only if I could afford it in a nice area. If it means comprising on area, I'd rather an apartment.

Now I'm old (haha), I would rather move further out to a nicer area and have freehold than a flat nearer London.

NameUnavailable

When you 'buy' a flat you need to understand that you're only buying a document - the lease - which is like a longer term rental agreement. You don't own anything. You can't touch the building apart from redecorating (if you want to alter anything or fit a new bathroom or whatever) you need to get permission and usually have to pay for that permission. If the lease drops below 90 years the value of the flat is impacted, if it drops below 80 years you will only be able to sell it to a cash buyer as none of the lenders will give a mortgage on a flat with a lease under 80 years. The cost to extend the lease can be many 10's of thousands of pounds.

You will probably have a management company and pay an annual service charge. This will cover routine maintenance and buildings insurance. If the service charge isn't sufficient to pay for intended work - let's say they want to replace the roof, or fit new windows - then you will get a bill for your share of the work and often little notice to pay (I had a bill of £20K once with 30 days to pay!).

Yes there are things like tribunal etc. but they can also be very costly and will consume your whole life if you get involved in a dispute.

On the upside you don't need to worry about doing any work to the building (you just pay others to do it) and a flat can be more secure than a house i.e. if you're away a lot. You can get a to live in a nicer area than if you bought a house and you get things like parking spaces and communal gardens (which you don't need to worry about either).

Grumpy_chap

I would always buy freehold house over leasehold flat assuming all other variables could be squared off.  IF (unlikely) I desperately needed a property right in the city centre, then I'd likely be forced to a flat.

NameUnavailable

Much as I don't want to I think my next property will have to be a flat, living in outer London and with the budget I've got it will mean a dilapidated house or a really dodgy area as opposed to a nice flat in a nice area. Unless I move further out and suffer a 1 or 2 hour commute........