Buy 'better value' but more expensive, or cheap n cheerful?

Leaseholder49

Trying to decide between 2 houses that are approx 30k (12%) different in price. Agents have given me an indication that they would accept asking price for cash and I think they are fairly priced so I'm reasonably confident in what I'd need to pay. My main dilemma is that I'm not looking for a forever home, so I've got to think about both resellability and the amount of effort I want to put into house maintenance while I'm there.

Both are Victorian and basically 2 beds, in different but equally good locations in town. Cheaper one is mid-terrace, 1 bathroom (only 1 toilet), 2 receptions, cellar. Needs some cosmetic work inside to fix up dubious/half-finished DIY but does have fairly new double-glazed windows throughout (quite unusual) and no obvious issues (pending survey obviously). 

More expensive is semi-detached, same basic room count but bigger rooms, better kitchen (size and fittings), second bathroom (ensuite) and a large loft conversion so potentially a 3rd bedroom. Most windows would need replacing, although not immediately I don't think, and there are signs of damp on a first floor chimney breast on the external side wall (no idea how serious this might be).

The second is more attractive, would be generally easier to live in and seems better value overall (definitely the one to go for as a long-term home), but would be more expensive to heat and I'm a bit concerned it could be a money sink with unknown issues emerging (particularly with the loft being non-original) that I'd be fixing mainly for the benefit of the next buyer. On the plus side, there is plenty of space to take in a lodger at least to get over the initial expenses (which wouldn't be possible at the cheaper one) which would net about £5k pa. It's also empty so chain-free (which is a positive as I really want to complete before stamp duty goes up next year).

The first would have annoyances like a tiny kitchen, no side access for gardening/bins, and lack of second toilet/bath for visitors, but they're things I think I could put up with in the relatively short term for the price. The vendors haven't found a property yet (understandable as they haven't sold) but I got the impression they would be pushing their affordability as they said it was difficult to find a 3 bed in town (a bit odd as there are lots, I've been looking at them), so there's potentially a delaying chain and even possibly vendor withdrawal situation there.

I'd have about 70k left in savings after buying the more expensive one, and my net income is around 5k per month (I currently save a good chunk of that) so I wouldn't be struggling, just not sure if I want that much commitment/risk.

Any thoughts?

youth_leader

The lack of side access at the terrace would be a no no for me.  I wait at a bus stop here in the village where the houses are terraced, and can see the builders taking materials through a recently purchased house,  barrows of sand etc.

You haven't mentioned parking? 

Leaseholder49

Neither have off-street parking but that is standard in those areas. Street parking is the same (no restrictions but not much space) at both. The more expensive one has a large public car park about 2 minutes' walk away (doesn't help long term but does at least pretty much guarantee being able to park if you really need to).

I don't have a car and the houses are both a short walk to town/buses/station so it doesn't bother me, and there's nothing to choose between them for future buyers.

ReadingTim

I would suggest that the market for the mid-terrace would be primarily FTBs, whereas the semi may appeal to 2nd steppers as well, meaning there's a wider pool of potential buyers for the semi when you come to sell, which can only be a good thing.  FTB-type properties will generally have a lower ceiling price too.  

EssexHebridean

Do you actually like either of these houses? Would one more than the other feel like a pleasure to return home to after a long day? It feels from your post as though you are looking at it as "buying a house" when what you actually need to think of is "buying a home". 

Imagine that something happens that means this purchase turns into your forever home - for whatever reason. Which one would be better in that instance? 

From practicality point of view, and having lived with a small kitchen for a lot of years, a large kitchen was a must for us when we were looking, and definitely rear/side access too! 

youth_leader

I've just remembered the horrors of 'bin day' when I was renting a terraced cottage whilst my house was in auction. We had to push our bins over an unmade pot holed road up to the main road.  Everyone used to watch to see who got theirs back in first, curtain twitchers.

The terrace will probably have a 'shared' access alley way at the back?

Leaseholder49

youth_leader said:

The terrace will probably have a 'shared' access alley way at the back?

No, there's no access at all. Gardens are back to back and there are no side passageways or r.o.w access along the backs of the houses (between house and garden).

Leaseholder49

EssexHebridean said:

Do you actually like either of these houses? Would one more than the other feel like a pleasure to return home to after a long day? It feels from your post as though you are looking at it as "buying a house" when what you actually need to think of is "buying a home". 

Imagine that something happens that means this purchase turns into your forever home - for whatever reason. Which one would be better in that instance?  

I'm very much buying a house (not a home), intentionally. I see it as a better choice than renting, despite the upfront cost (protecting against house price rises as interest rates on my savings go down, plus renting is so expensive and properties are hard to find). That's why I'd put up with the issues with the cheaper one, and question the effort needed on the more expensive one.

I like them both enough to live in for now (I am out a lot), but only the more expensive one would be a long-term home. I can't forsee a situation where it would need to be though - I already own another property in a more expensive area elsewhere in the country which has been rented out for 18 years. At some point I intend to sell that to contribute to a proper home (yes I'm fully up to speed on CGT and additional SDLT). I'm single, middle-aged and have no intention of cohabiting or acquiring any sort of family.

Emmia

Leaseholder49 said:

youth_leader said:

The terrace will probably have a 'shared' access alley way at the back?

No, there's no access at all. Gardens are back to back and there are no side passageways or r.o.w access along the backs of the houses (between house and garden).

For me, it would be the semi, no question.

You can replace the windows and do other works, but what you can't add is side/rear access.

I lived in a mid terrace with rear access with a path at the back which was closed off at one end, it was a pain wheeling the bin almost the entire length of the terrace to put it out (ours was one in from the closed off end), but I'd rather that than being forced to take it through the house 

Albermarle

Does the semi have a garden?

  I'm a bit concerned it could be a money sink with unknown issues emerging (particularly with the loft being non-original) 

There are regular posts on the forum about loft conversions.

There are three basic types.
1) A budget job, where there is no proper staircase ( just some kind of ladder arrangement) and lacking in adequate strengthening and fire resistance. These are really only suitable for storage, but people do use them for home offices, hobby rooms and even a bedroom, although there risks involved. These can only be described by the EA as a loft room and not a bedroom ( even if it is currently used as one)
2) A more proper conversion but where for some reason it has not been approved by Building control, so there is no paperwork. Again it can not be described as a bedroom/habitable space.
3) A proper conversion with full building control paperwork . Can be described and used as a bedroom . There should be no ongoing issues due to the fact that it is non original.

Leaseholder49

Thanks - I'm not sure if I could find out the anything about the type/'legitimacy' of the conversion before having an offer accepted. The agent describes it as a 3 bedroom house and the loft room as bedroom 3 (it also has a toilet up there), but also in the general blurb refers to 'loft room'. It's quite a major construction, carpeted, fitted wardrobes, big span of double glazing on each side - not just boarding, painting the walls and putting in a skylight.

I was thinking of potential issues because of poor joining to the original roof, new flat roof deteriorating etc, just general building issues.

They both have back gardens - the semi-detached is bigger and has a front garden as well. Terrace has a small walled area at the front which is big enough for bins and a small shed-type thing.