House not selling - same feedback every time! What would you do?

ReadySteadyPop

DE_612183 said:

thebratprince said:

Niv said:

Let me start by saying - I think your home is lovely (minor gripe with the fake grass lol).

I do not know the aera, or what similar homes are sold at so cannot comment on price but my instinct is that you need to wait for the right buyer. In my opinion homes like this do not fit the more common timelines sometimes associated by houses of this size (three bed terrace I mean).

I think that some people will expect 'standard' height houses, especially if they are also looking at modern houses so when they come to your place it will feel 'lower'. Do people need to duck to get through any doorways etc? Price (without being drastic) wont make much difference to someone not wanting to duck to get through a doorway. I struggled a bit with my previous home as the stairway was spiral rather than a standard dogleg - but eventually it sold without dropping price unrealistically. My current house put some buyers off as the stairway is 'non standard' to say the least amongst a number of other things. 

One of the problems I see is that phrases like 'open plan' can give an image of space and height ceilings.

To your question, 'what would I do' - I would change the wording slightly to make it clearer that the ceilings might be lower than standard  - I am not a wordsmith but assume the EA can think of something. And I would take a hard look at other houses for sale in the vicinity at the same /close price and ask myself the question - Would I prefer my house or this house  and if you keep coming to not your house maybe it is price?

What drew you to that house in the first place?

The first part amused me - we also despised the fake grass and were going to change it before we realised how great it was not having to clean the dog's paws every time he came inside! We fell in love with the character - the stone, the quirks, the beams. In addition to the 'extras' like the home office (we both wfh) and huge garage, which other cottages didn't seem to have for the same price at the time. Trouble is, I'm not sure that city-escapees wanting to wfh in the countryside is our market anymore.

Our price reduction will probably have to be drastic to make a difference, the two small reductions haven't shifted anything much. Good to hear you sold eventually though, it's tough when you don't live in a standard place.

Thank you for your thoughts. 

One point about price reductions are that there are extensions on google that show price reductions, see screenshot - so sometimes it's better to take it off the market - wait a few weeks then put back up perhaps with another agent. As can be seen from the screenshot - this one looks like a desperate seller so will be inclined to attract chacers with much lower offers....

The solution is to price sensibly at the start, taking it off the market will have very little effect if it is still overpriced.

ReadySteadyPop

Olinda99 said:

the market at the moment is pretty much at a.standstill although of course doesn't mean no houses are selling whatsoever 

and the other reason is the expectation of lower mortgage interest rates

today three banks have reduced their intest rates for their mortgages and therefore I think we will see an uptick in the market in the near future

I would not give your house away unless of course you can get a corresponding huge reduction on the new place you are buying

The overall trend is most definitely up though.....

https://www.introducertoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2024/6/first-time-buyer-mortgage-costs-soar

Bank "teaser rates" are never a good guide to affordability.

Myci85

I can't see the listing as it has been removed, but I would agree with people saying to make sure the room dimensions are on the floor plan.

Also, definitely make sure the photos on the listing are actually representative of the space. So many are taken to make rooms look bigger than they are, and then of course the reality disappoints. We viewed a house with an agent that made a point of getting realistic photos, and felt the rooms were as we expected. That house is now on with a different agent and they've made the rooms, and the space at the front of the house, look way bigger than the reality. 

Also, if the house is a characterful period cottage, play to the strengths of that. There are people (myself included) who would much prefer an old, characterful cottage over what I call a 'square box house'!

newsgroupmonkey_

Scotbot said:

newsgroupmonkey_ said:

BonaDea said:

Your house and garden look lovely.  But I think you have three problems:

 According to house metric the median price in your postcode is £3400 per square metre, giving a house price of £285,600.  Only 25% of homes in that postcode achieve more than £4250 per square metre, meaning that your house would have to be significantly more desirable than most homes around you in order to achieve more than £357,000.

With the exception of London and high-value properties (neither of these fit) very few would ever use this metric as a way of valuing a property. Perhaps maybe old-skool surveyors who are really struggling to get comparables.

In this case, there are plenty of comparables.

Source: Someone very senior and experienced in S&V sitting next to me!

It is a common metric overseas. I use it and suspect the reason EAs don't like it here is that it clearly identifies properties that are at the high end price wise

I understand what you're saying. And I also understand why this might be the case in London.
But once you get outside, there are a number of other factors that you really can't just use a square footage.
Location, location, location for a start. End of terrace. Cul-de-sac. Right side of the road. And so on.

And ultimately, despite what Crashy might think, a house is worth whatever someone is prepared to pay for it.

BarelySentientAI

newsgroupmonkey_ said:

Scotbot said:

newsgroupmonkey_ said:

BonaDea said:

Your house and garden look lovely.  But I think you have three problems:

 According to house metric the median price in your postcode is £3400 per square metre, giving a house price of £285,600.  Only 25% of homes in that postcode achieve more than £4250 per square metre, meaning that your house would have to be significantly more desirable than most homes around you in order to achieve more than £357,000.

With the exception of London and high-value properties (neither of these fit) very few would ever use this metric as a way of valuing a property. Perhaps maybe old-skool surveyors who are really struggling to get comparables.

In this case, there are plenty of comparables.

Source: Someone very senior and experienced in S&V sitting next to me!

It is a common metric overseas. I use it and suspect the reason EAs don't like it here is that it clearly identifies properties that are at the high end price wise

I understand what you're saying. And I also understand why this might be the case in London.
But once you get outside, there are a number of other factors that you really can't just use a square footage.
Location, location, location for a start. End of terrace. Cul-de-sac. Right side of the road. And so on.

And ultimately, despite what Crashy might think, a house is worth whatever someone is prepared to pay for it.

You don't just use £/ft though.  It's a very simple calculation that shows you whether something is high or low, relatively, when compared to others.  Then you look for an explanation for that, which is all the other things you say 

We need to start using it more, not ignoring it.  this bizarre fascination in the UK market of bedroom count being the defining (and sometimes only published) characteristic is just odd.

newsgroupmonkey_

BarelySentientAI said:

newsgroupmonkey_ said:

Scotbot said:

newsgroupmonkey_ said:

BonaDea said:

Your house and garden look lovely.  But I think you have three problems:

 According to house metric the median price in your postcode is £3400 per square metre, giving a house price of £285,600.  Only 25% of homes in that postcode achieve more than £4250 per square metre, meaning that your house would have to be significantly more desirable than most homes around you in order to achieve more than £357,000.

With the exception of London and high-value properties (neither of these fit) very few would ever use this metric as a way of valuing a property. Perhaps maybe old-skool surveyors who are really struggling to get comparables.

In this case, there are plenty of comparables.

Source: Someone very senior and experienced in S&V sitting next to me!

It is a common metric overseas. I use it and suspect the reason EAs don't like it here is that it clearly identifies properties that are at the high end price wise

I understand what you're saying. And I also understand why this might be the case in London.
But once you get outside, there are a number of other factors that you really can't just use a square footage.
Location, location, location for a start. End of terrace. Cul-de-sac. Right side of the road. And so on.

And ultimately, despite what Crashy might think, a house is worth whatever someone is prepared to pay for it.

You don't just use £/ft though.  It's a very simple calculation that shows you whether something is high or low, relatively, when compared to others.  Then you look for an explanation for that, which is all the other things you say 

We need to start using it more, not ignoring it.  this bizarre fascination in the UK market of bedroom count being the defining (and sometimes only published) characteristic is just odd.

The reason we do is that despite a 2 bedroom house being 300 sqm and a 3 bedroom house being 100 sqm, the 2 bedroom could well be rubbish for a family of 4 (or like us, a family of 2 who both work from home and have grown-up children and therefore need a spare room).

For example.

Our current house. Detached Bungalow 80 sqm. 3 bed. Detached garage. 3 sheds, semi-brick greenhouse.15sqm conservatory. Footprint around 600 sqm with parking for 5 cars.
First house in a tiny private cul-de-sac with no parking or houses near us. Forest opposite the C-D-S. Village green the other side.

Previous house. Detached (barely) 150 sqm house. 3 bed. Garden was barely 100 sqm rear, smaller front which was paved for 2 cars. Single shed and small workshop.
End of Cul-de-sac, but limited parking. No privacy. 1980s estate.

Thing is, previous house was great, but barely any outside room and felt like it was enclosed. This one is light and airy. Same village. We paid £30k more for this one.

But based on square footage, we were ripped off. I cannot explain more how different the houses are.

Chemistry777

When I sold my previous property which was very small, I had moved into another property with my partner.  This meant that I could "stage" for the viewing.  We went semi-furnished that allowed the property to be visualised as a home but with far less "clutter", this definitely gave the impression of space.

Also a basket of veg from our small veg patch was on the side

Also, ensure everyone is out (if estate agent doing viewings), or just one person in (if you are doing the viewings).

All that said, I thought your photos and house looked lovely and just the kind of property we will, so you just need to wait for that perfect buyer.

Grumpy_chap

thebratprince said:

We've been on the market for over 4 months, and reduced the price twice in that time. A consistent flow of viewings (about 1 per week) but no offers at all, despite many viewers saying the house is immaculate. The only consistent negative feedback is that it's too small.

With the house being "too small", and I have no idea how things are arranged internally, but is it down to the furniture etc.?

I know when we sold my Mum's house, even though it was the same size as every other house on the estate, "too small" was a common comment.  I think that was really that Mum had been in the house for 50 years so had a life-time of accumulation of "stuff" and just too much furniture so, even though it was a large house, it could feel cramped.  (It was possibly made worse by her being of a generation that never threw anything away.)

Choice of furniture, so an oversized sofa, or squeezing a table into the "kitchen breakfast room" when the room is only really a kitchen sized space, can all make a good sized house seem small.  Think of show homes on Developer estates - even the pokiest flat looks large because there is hardly any furniture anywhere.

Child "stuff" can also take up a lot of space, so a buggy in the hall and play things in the living room can all need walking around when viewing the property and create the impression of "small".

Obviously, I have no information to comment as to how much "stuff" is in your house or otherwise.  You might be able to "dress" the house by simple things such as leaving the baby buggy in the car, for example, when there is a viewing.  It will make that part of the house where the buggy normally parks suddenly look bigger.  Remember, a viewing is the new purchasers - assume a couple - plus the EA - plus, possibly purchaser's children - plus, possibly, you.  That could be five people walking around a space where there might only typically be the one of you at a time.

DE_612183

Grumpy_chap said:

thebratprince said:

We've been on the market for over 4 months, and reduced the price twice in that time. A consistent flow of viewings (about 1 per week) but no offers at all, despite many viewers saying the house is immaculate. The only consistent negative feedback is that it's too small.

With the house being "too small", and I have no idea how things are arranged internally, but is it down to the furniture etc.?

I know when we sold my Mum's house, even though it was the same size as every other house on the estate, "too small" was a common comment.  I think that was really that Mum had been in the house for 50 years so had a life-time of accumulation of "stuff" and just too much furniture so, even though it was a large house, it could feel cramped.  (It was possibly made worse by her being of a generation that never threw anything away.)

Choice of furniture, so an oversized sofa, or squeezing a table into the "kitchen breakfast room" when the room is only really a kitchen sized space, can all make a good sized house seem small.  Think of show homes on Developer estates - even the pokiest flat looks large because there is hardly any furniture anywhere.

Child "stuff" can also take up a lot of space, so a buggy in the hall and play things in the living room can all need walking around when viewing the property and create the impression of "small".

Obviously, I have no information to comment as to how much "stuff" is in your house or otherwise.  You might be able to "dress" the house by simple things such as leaving the baby buggy in the car, for example, when there is a viewing.  It will make that part of the house where the buggy normally parks suddenly look bigger.  Remember, a viewing is the new purchasers - assume a couple - plus the EA - plus, possibly purchaser's children - plus, possibly, you.  That could be five people walking around a space where there might only typically be the one of you at a time.

Last time I sold a house we used to fill up two cars of "stuff" which we used on a day-to-day basis but made the house look messy and cramped.

MeteredOut

DE_612183 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

thebratprince said:

We've been on the market for over 4 months, and reduced the price twice in that time. A consistent flow of viewings (about 1 per week) but no offers at all, despite many viewers saying the house is immaculate. The only consistent negative feedback is that it's too small.

With the house being "too small", and I have no idea how things are arranged internally, but is it down to the furniture etc.?

I know when we sold my Mum's house, even though it was the same size as every other house on the estate, "too small" was a common comment.  I think that was really that Mum had been in the house for 50 years so had a life-time of accumulation of "stuff" and just too much furniture so, even though it was a large house, it could feel cramped.  (It was possibly made worse by her being of a generation that never threw anything away.)

Choice of furniture, so an oversized sofa, or squeezing a table into the "kitchen breakfast room" when the room is only really a kitchen sized space, can all make a good sized house seem small.  Think of show homes on Developer estates - even the pokiest flat looks large because there is hardly any furniture anywhere.

Child "stuff" can also take up a lot of space, so a buggy in the hall and play things in the living room can all need walking around when viewing the property and create the impression of "small".

Obviously, I have no information to comment as to how much "stuff" is in your house or otherwise.  You might be able to "dress" the house by simple things such as leaving the baby buggy in the car, for example, when there is a viewing.  It will make that part of the house where the buggy normally parks suddenly look bigger.  Remember, a viewing is the new purchasers - assume a couple - plus the EA - plus, possibly purchaser's children - plus, possibly, you.  That could be five people walking around a space where there might only typically be the one of you at a time.

Last time I sold a house we used to fill up two cars of "stuff" which we used on a day-to-day basis but made the house look messy and cramped.

The children?