Help, Im in a dilemma whether to buy a modern timer frame house

dutchey

ProDave said:

I guess it depends who builds it and where.

I live in a self built timber frame house in Scotland, where such things are normal.  Mine does not creak like an old ship as you walk around and is far far warmer and quieter than any masonry house ever will be.

In the early days of timber frame building in England, there were some horror stories about poorly built houses by builders that did not care or did not know how to do it properly, and some early timber frame houses were built without any insulation in the frame, so would have been cold and expensive to heat.  So it is not as simple as all timber frame houses are either good or bad.

Post some more details about who built it and where, what the survey said about it, and what is the EPC which will give a good clue about how much insulation it has.

Wilson Connolly were the building standard to which one of their sub contractors built in 2002. The EPC is 66. The walls sound as hollow as can be. Entire estates were constructed cheaply and quickly and mass churned out

mi-key

Sarahspangles said:

With a few exceptions, the expected lifespan of houses built since the middle of the last century has been 60-80 years.  Lots of us are living on borrowed time!  

Where did you hear that ? The expected lifespan of brick built houses definitely isn't 60-80 years? Look at how many victorian terraces there are, and 1930s semis, they are over that age and perfectly solid

Sarahspangles

mi-key said:

Sarahspangles said:

With a few exceptions, the expected lifespan of houses built since the middle of the last century has been 60-80 years.  Lots of us are living on borrowed time!  

Where did you hear that ? The expected lifespan of brick built houses definitely isn't 60-80 years? Look at how many victorian terraces there are, and 1930s semis, they are over that age and perfectly solid

This link summarises British Standard requirements for the structural bits of buildings from 1990 - it’s not possible to link to the standards themselves as they are copyright.  

https://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips-nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=750

It mentions that before 1990 the standard was 60 years, but go back far enough and there was no standard.   Victorian buildings that are still standing may have been well built or have had work done - a huge volume were cleared as unfit slums in the 60s. Lots more have needed underpinning, or the brickwork can be too solid - ‘racking’ when the front face of a terrace acts as a unit can lead to complete failure.

Modern houses don’t fall down on their 50th birthday but when issues emerge it’s normal to be told some component has reached the end of its design lifetime.  Wall ties, for example.  Chequebook time.

ProDave

mi-key said:

Sarahspangles said:

With a few exceptions, the expected lifespan of houses built since the middle of the last century has been 60-80 years.  Lots of us are living on borrowed time!  

 The expected lifespan of brick built houses definitely isn't 60-80 years? Look at how many victorian terraces there are, and 1930s semis, they are over that age and perfectly solid

But, those very old brick buildings while "solid" are well deficcient in terms on insulation and modern air tightness and comfort levels, so arguably are near end of life and due to be replaced with something better.  Once someone works out how and who is going to pay.  The next poor housing slum clearance I suspect.

Which would you rather buy now?  a modern timber frame that is half decent in comfort and energy usage or an old draughty cold and damp brick house that uses energy like it is free and has no envirinmental impact?

mi-key

Sarahspangles said:

mi-key said:

Sarahspangles said:

With a few exceptions, the expected lifespan of houses built since the middle of the last century has been 60-80 years.  Lots of us are living on borrowed time!  

Where did you hear that ? The expected lifespan of brick built houses definitely isn't 60-80 years? Look at how many victorian terraces there are, and 1930s semis, they are over that age and perfectly solid

This link summarises British Standard requirements for the structural bits of buildings from 1990 - it’s not possible to link to the standards themselves as they are copyright.  

https://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips-nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=750

It mentions that before 1990 the standard was 60 years, but go back far enough and there was no standard.   Victorian buildings that are still standing may have been well built or have had work done - a huge volume were cleared as unfit slums in the 60s. Lots more have needed underpinning, or the brickwork can be too solid - ‘racking’ when the front face of a terrace acts as a unit can lead to complete failure.

Modern houses don’t fall down on their 50th birthday but when issues emerge it’s normal to be told some component has reached the end of its design lifetime.  Wall ties, for example.  Chequebook time.

Those are for concrete structures, which are very different from brick built.

Britain has millions of victorian terraced houses, pretty much every town has them, and very few need any major work doing to keep them standing.like underpinning. Most of the slums that were cleared werent because the houses were falling down, it was because the conditions in them were very unsanitary and they were tiny and the areas they were built in were very overcrowded

My house is coming up for 65 years old, the one I lived in before was from 1930. Neither have needed structural work doing to them, nor every shown any sign of needing doing. Most of the village I live in was built from 1900 - 1960 and I haven't noticed any houses falling down or evidence of structural work being done on them to hold them up.

mi-key

ProDave said:

mi-key said:

Sarahspangles said:

With a few exceptions, the expected lifespan of houses built since the middle of the last century has been 60-80 years.  Lots of us are living on borrowed time!  

 The expected lifespan of brick built houses definitely isn't 60-80 years? Look at how many victorian terraces there are, and 1930s semis, they are over that age and perfectly solid

But, those very old brick buildings while "solid" are well deficcient in terms on insulation and modern air tightness and comfort levels, so arguably are near end of life and due to be replaced with something better.  Once someone works out how and who is going to pay.  The next poor housing slum clearance I suspect.

Which would you rather buy now?  a modern timber frame that is half decent in comfort and energy usage or an old draughty cold and damp brick house that uses energy like it is free and has no envirinmental impact?

I would rather buy a proper brick built house than timber framed. Britain doesnt really have the climate for timber framed housing on large scales. 

I doubt the millions of people in this country who live in pre 1930 brick built houses would consider them to be draughty and cold.

I'm not talking about slum housing, tradition bay fronted 1930s semis in my area start at around £350K and are very desirable as family homes and terraced at around £200K for a 2 bed. Do you really think these areas are going to be cleared as being slums :d

Sarahspangles

mi-key said:

Sarahspangles said:

mi-key said:

Sarahspangles said:

With a few exceptions, the expected lifespan of houses built since the middle of the last century has been 60-80 years.  Lots of us are living on borrowed time!  

Where did you hear that ? The expected lifespan of brick built houses definitely isn't 60-80 years? Look at how many victorian terraces there are, and 1930s semis, they are over that age and perfectly solid

This link summarises British Standard requirements for the structural bits of buildings from 1990 - it’s not possible to link to the standards themselves as they are copyright.  

https://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips-nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=750

It mentions that before 1990 the standard was 60 years, but go back far enough and there was no standard.   Victorian buildings that are still standing may have been well built or have had work done - a huge volume were cleared as unfit slums in the 60s. Lots more have needed underpinning, or the brickwork can be too solid - ‘racking’ when the front face of a terrace acts as a unit can lead to complete failure.

Modern houses don’t fall down on their 50th birthday but when issues emerge it’s normal to be told some component has reached the end of its design lifetime.  Wall ties, for example.  Chequebook time.

Those are for concrete structures, which are very different from brick built.

Britain has millions of victorian terraced houses, pretty much every town has them, and very few need any major work doing to keep them standing.like underpinning. Most of the slums that were cleared werent because the houses were falling down, it was because the conditions in them were very unsanitary and they were tiny and the areas they were built in were very overcrowded

My house is coming up for 65 years old, the one I lived in before was from 1930. Neither have needed structural work doing to them, nor every shown any sign of needing doing. Most of the village I live in was built from 1900 - 1960 and I haven't noticed any houses falling down or evidence of structural work being done on them to hold them up.

BS 1990 applies to all structural components.  I absolutely agree that the majority of housing built before WW2 and still standing is non-problematic, but I would never buy one without a full structural survey because in the absence of standards you’re reliant in the trustworthiness of a builder who’s long gone.