Dilemma - new vs old, expensive vs cheaper!

Rosa_Damascena

I would always go for a home with a south or west facing garden. Old and new properties have pros and cons but generally I'd go for older as they are more spacious. I hate being cold but things can be done about that.

TripleH

We have a new build.

We've had to pay out for flooring in lounge and hall, fitted cupboards in 2 bed rooms and paint.

We're not overly happy with the layout of the kitchen (it doesn't quite suit our needs) but thats personal choice.

The paint quality on the new build especially the woodwork is poor and we will need to touch it up.

Not trying to put you off (we love our home) but you are dependent on the efforts of the developer at finishing things off.

Niv

My first house I bought in 2000 was built in 1984 - that was as modern as i got
Next house was 1846
Current house was built approx. 1600.

My favorite of the lot is the current place. All houses have their positives and negative though. If I were to buy again it would be period but maybe with a little more thought towards energy saving / generation.

GixerKate

At the end of the day its personal preference.  I bought my new build a year and a half ago and its been great.  The build quality is good and we haven't had to do anything to the house except for sort out the back garden.  The paint on the walls is not great but its not supposed to be as everything needs to settle and dry out.  We will be looking at splashing some paint around this year I think.  We moved from a 1950s house that needing everything doing to it and everything was a work in progress for years.  Its been great moving into the new build and not having to do a thing.

Just because a property was built a while ago doesn't necessary mean the build quality is better.  There are great 1960 houses and there are some terrible ones just in the same way there are some great new builds and some terrible ones.

TBagpuss

Merlin's_Beard said:

I'm faced with a choice and I've got no one to talk it over with, so would appreciate any advice/words of wisdom etc!

There is an extensive newbuild development in the small town I want to buy in, with a house that is pretty much exactly what I want in terms of layout (garage, kitchen/diner, closed off lounge that will stay warm, southwest facing garden), may have parking issues (block of 4x 1 bed flats nearby with minimal assigned parking) but is £320k, which is very, very at the top end of my budget (obviously will need carpeting/garden sorting as extra, hopefully budgeted for with parents offering to chip in as a safety net if I fall short).

There are other cheaper houses on the estate that are going for £295k ish, but none currently with a garage and all with tiny north facing gardens. There look like some amazingly placed houses of that type that might be available at some point, but not even down as "coming soon" yet)

There are also several houses that are older, with asking prices around £260-280k, with various things going on that make them not exactly what I want to a point where it wouldn't easily be fixable (ie not just "new bathroom and kitchen", but either fixed ie garden direction or complex ie a major internal rebuild to make it what I want)

Am I being ridiculous going for the more expensive newbuild (that is quite possibly of a lower build quality) when that one is likely to drop in price whereas renovating the older ones would add value? Am I just being a brat for thinking that a bought house can meet all my requirements and that my wants and - frankly laziness of not wanting or having headspace for a major rebuild - are worth potentially £60k more than what I could be paying? It feels like a lot of money, and not the best financial decision, but after renting in compromise houses for 10 years there's a lot of me that wants the easy and fast answer.

I don't think that you are being ridiculous - your time and effort has a value as well, so buying somewhere that you can comfortably move in and happily live in isn't laziness, (or just laziness!) and avoiding the stress of having to do work on the property is a reasonable choice. 

I also think that the fact that a new build is likely to dip in value once it's purchased is only likely to matter if you anticipate wanting to sell again in the near future - if you are planning for this to be your home for the longer term then it becomes less and less of an issue over time.

ALso, I think it is totally reasonable to look at the specific property you are considering - it's not as simple as old - good / new bad , or vice versa. For instance, both of the last times I was house hunting I looked at both. I ended up with older properties both times, but that was because of the specifics which were important to me - for example, I wanted larger rooms, in my most recent move, having a garden and off-street parking were important to me - I couldn't get the combination of inside and outside space that I wanted in a newer property, and for me, living with ugly decor, and a poorly designed kitchen were worth the pay off of  getting the space and location I wanted, but I have spent a lot of money, and had a fair amount of disruption (getting the whole house re-plastered, for example, if very disruptive in the short term!)  I still have a crappy kitchen (partly, it has to be said, because what I *really* want will involve some fairly major structural alternations and I'm unwilling to spend too much on a new kitchen in the current space when I'm hoping to be able to make bigger changes eventually)
All of which is long winded way of saying if the new, more expensive house ticks all your boxes, go for it. Especially as things like having suitable parking and the shape and orientation of the garden are not things you can add or change later

Gycraig

Personally I would only buy new builds after my good experience, 0 issues in 3 years just Whacked my furniture in and cracked on.

last thing I want is for my house to be a building site or to come home from work and have to do work myself. 

With the way energy bills are going there’s a massive difference between a d and a b for running costs. 

No point saving 100-150 quid a month on mortgage just to pay it to heat your house. 

onylon

My sister and I both moved during the pandemic. I bought a 1990's property and she bought a new build.

I think the big downside to the new build was the garden, which was a boggy mess and totally unusable in winter.  The whole thing had to be taken up, french drains put in and top soil replaced before re-planting/re-turfing. This was very expensive and most of the money went into things that you can't see so it's unlikely to add value to the property. This issue caused a lot of stress as they had a puppy who really needed access to the garden. The other big complaint they have is lack of local amenities and green space but they knew about that when they purchased.  Snagging wasn't too bad but there were quite a lot of minor issues with fittings being put in wonky or upside-down, so there was some hassle factor.

On the plus side they have a really nice kitchen and bathroom, done to their taste, the insulation is good and inside the house they only had decor to worry about. They are generally very happy with their home.

My 90s house had been generally well maintained and already been extensively modernised. I have done lots of general maintenance work eg. replacing sagging hinges, re-sealing round the bath and re-decorating. I'm also working on planting up the garden as I think it looks a bit naked. My biggest complaint is that I find the kitchen layout impractical and I'm reluctant to rip it out while it's still in good condition. We have also had minor plumbing issues, slow leaks etc which cost about £400 total to get fixed. TBH I think it's been less work/expense/stress than the new build so far but we will probably have some big bits to do sooner than them eg. Replacing double glazing units when they fail.

I would be really reluctant to buy a house right at the top of my budget because you always find things to spend money on in a new house. I would be even more reluctant if that house was a new build but that might just be because I've never bought one myself.

lookstraightahead

I think house and area depends on what is important to you at that particular time. When my kids were young, I wanted to be where it was convenient to things they needed. Now that's not important so I'm in an old period house. I've never liked estates or road traffic, so where the house is situated takes preference before I look at a house. I'm not against new builds but they usually tend to be on estates.

On the other hand, things like which way the garden faces and even driveways don't bother me at all. In fact, my main concern is always whether you can hear traffic. I don't even mind if the house only has one loo.

robatwork

As you've seen, some on here have had a great experience with new builds. Some terrible. I'm the latter and would never buy another new build.

Who is your builder - it really does make a difference. Some of the large companies build down to a price and timescale and would be better employing trained monkeys given the level of care their jobbing "builders" take on site.

theoretica

Might you stay living longer in the house you like better?  Buying the cheaper house and then moving to something more expensive would have two lots of buying expenses, more tax etc.