Would no central heating put you off?

mcplumb

Early 80's build with no changes other than recent DG windows, so its around 60-70 watts/m2 heatloss.

silverwhistle

Emmia said:

Albermarle said:

fletcher1985 said:

it wouldn't bother me as i would get a log burner fitted anyway. i have a log burner now and never use the heating so really its down to the person buying 

If I was buying I would be concerned about ever greater environmental controls on log burning in future.
Not much point banning gas boilers if some just get replaced by log burners, so I would guess some more stringent controls on them in future.

There's also the health issue around indoor particulate pollution from log burners 

Strangely enough I have an air quality monitor in my lounge near the log burner which virtually never registers when I have the fire on (unless I make a mistake) but frequently does when I'm cooking in the kitchen through two doorways. All electric cooking too..

Veteransaver

fletcher1985 said:

it wouldn't bother me as i would get a log burner fitted anyway. i have a log burner now and never use the heating so really its down to the person buying 

Unless you get free wood then a wood burner isn't cheap to run, neither is a proper install.
And a wood burner is a serious amount of hassle, and very bad for both you and your neighbours health.
They need to be banned, especially in built up areas, we have a few neighbours with them and they can really stink up the street in winter.

sheramber

We had a clean burn wood burning stove which does noit pollute the air. 

Extra oxygen  is used to  combust all the gasses.

A £300 lorry load of logs direct from the woodland pasted 6 years.

Central heating in for 1 hour in the morning to heat the house up first thing in as the stove was not on overnighwinter , and the stove easily heated a 4 bedroom house in the higlnads for the rest of the day.

simongregson

The impression I get in our local area is that properties bought for buy to let the new landlord removes the gas system as an all electric one does not require gas certification and will have much lower maintenance costs. With them not having to pay the bills and the lack of available rentals unfortunately (for the tenants!) this is working for them.

BikingBud

mcplumb said:

Early 80's build with no changes other than recent DG windows, so its around 60-70 watts/m2 heatloss.

I would walk away because of poor insulation:

RedFraggle

Not sure it's fair to lump everything pre-2006 into a category it'll very much depend on the build.
Worst insulated house I had was 1950s. Thirties houses better. Had an 88 built persimmon 3 bed, warmest house I ever had. My current 2000 build all electric flat is extremely good on insulation. 
Depends. 

BikingBud

RedFraggle said:

Not sure it's fair to lump everything pre-2006 into a category it'll very much depend on the build.
Worst insulated house I had was 1950s. Thirties houses better. Had an 88 built persimmon 3 bed, warmest house I ever had. My current 2000 build all electric flat is extremely good on insulation. 
Depends. 

Take that up with heat geek but the point was that if the OP considers the house reasonable with GCH but a heating requirement of 60-70 watts/m2 the criteria they are using to determine a house's suitability might be poorly focussed.

And the overall lack of engagement on the point of discussion does indicate it is a common issue. We have a stock of poorly built, poorly insulated homes. We argue about fitting systems that can heat these homes but don't treat the cause ie improve the insulation. 

To my mind a flawed outlook. Building houses that are well insulated, maximise solar gains and exploit solar PV as well as only needing a small heat source should be the required building standards not perpetuating use of gas boilers.

Veteransaver

sheramber said:

We had a clean burn wood burning stove which does noit pollute the air. 

Extra oxygen  is used to  combust all the gasses.

A £300 lorry load of logs direct from the woodland pasted 6 years.

Central heating in for 1 hour in the morning to heat the house up first thing in as the stove was not on overnighwinter , and the stove easily heated a 4 bedroom house in the higlnads for the rest of the day.

"Does not pollute the air" 🙄
There is no such thing unfortunately.

saajan_12

mcplumb said:

BikingBud said:

Five pages and it appears nobody has questioned the quantity and quality of the insulation. Why?

If the heat loss is extremely low because it has been well insulated then it may suffice to use a small heat source and spending 10K or expecting a reduction of ~50k as some seem to want on here, indicates how little we really think or understand about the technical aspects of our housing.

Why not get a full energy survey done, don't just trust the EPC and see what comes of that.

To replace the perfectly good system that was in place previously its 10k with making good costs.

Add in hassle and we don't have a window to complete the works prior to moving in I'd say it's 15k ish to allow

Well then you have your answer, that's what you're willing to pay, so go ahead... 
Of course others the seller may not be willing to go that low because other buyers may not share your opinion. 

Without further information on the insulation etc, I'd suggest all in ~£5k off the asking. Reason being that £10k off gives you a completely free choice of which system to use (may not even need to switch if its efficient) and if you do switch then it gives you a brand boiler etc. If it was an existing CH system then it'd be x years old, you wouldn't have any money off but it would still need replacing sooner. So overall a % of the installation costs, say5-7k is fair and the most I'd agree to as a seller.