Secondhand houses

[flipflap75]

Read the mysterious 'service charge' thread and had a Google - I found a thread on another forum where they were discussing council service charges on freehold properties, and there were some really strong opinions about houses which weren't new builds (not necessarily old or character, just not new) e.g.

"...some people don't want someone else's seconds. It's slightly demeaning isn't it? It's second only to renting. The place may never really feel as though it is yours."

and

"...don't like the thought of using secondhand soiled goods"

I've never thought of houses like this - as something which becomes 'used' or 'secondhand'. Not trying to stir up a 'how could you possibly live in a new/old house' barney - it's all about layout and position for me. Just wondered if I'm in the minority re. this 'secondhand' view.

It's utterly silly to poo-poo second hand houses! What an odd thing to say. That's almost as daft as refusing to drive down a road because other cars have driven down it!

I love old houses actually, but although they can look nice and cool etc, they can be expensive to heat and maintain. And although it's true that some new build are poor quality, some new build are ok. Nothing is built or made like it used to be though, and houses are no exception. We have a number of 500 to 800 year old houses in our town, I don't see the 300 newbuild homes that run in rows of terraces lasting that long somehow.

And I know several builders who worked for a few big housebuilders over the past decade or so, and they said they are told to build as many homes as possible, as quickly as possible, in the smallest space possible. With the cheapest materials. I know 4 different people who bought newbuild in the past 2 years; 3 in a tiny terrace in a row that was thrown up in no time at all, and one who lives in a 4 bed detached 'executive' home with a big garden that cost triple what the others cost.

Apart from the usual issues, the more expensive one is fine, and my friend is happy with it. But the other 3 say they hear next door when they flush the loo, when they sneeze, and when they snore. And the gardens are tiny, (front and back,) the walls are already going damp, and the bathroom and kitchen have been riddled with flaws. In addition, some of the homes have been sold to private landlords and they have transient private tenants in there, and about 1 in 5 are social housing. They didn't know this when they bought, and so they paid £200K for a home next to a family on benefits with between 3 and 6 kids. (Their words, not mine...)

When all is said and done, I think the best age house to buy is 1950's to 1980's. But if you are prepared to (or able to) pay top dollar, you can get a decent new build yes. It's a shame to say they are nasty and soulless, but I wouldn't worry; I am sure the houses of the 1940's and 1950's had the same thing said about them when lots of council houses were built.

Remember the song Little Boxes - Joan Baez was it? From the 1960's? So even then some people felt lots of similar looking houses were bland and soulless...

There was a thread on here awhile ago from someone who posted about not being able to afford a new house so they would have to settle for "second hand". At the time I didn't comment but I remember thinking it was beyond bizare and the poster possibly very young and not very clever.

My home is listed, over four hundred years old, the rooms are huge. It's not just second hand, it's several times hand..

I've never heard a home refered to as second hand other than on mumsnet and I genuinely think only certain disadvantaged people would refer to something like a home as second hand.

I'm not a fan of new builds. I follow a few new build accounts on Instagram and they seem very "on trend" e.g all Persimmon Homes for example, offer 5 variations of grey carpet to choose from, two marble work surfaces and 3 different style kitchen cupboards then they are all the same layout. They don't seem to have a lovely lived in look.

Our house isn't new but I'm not sure it classes as second hand. It was built in the 1930's as a council house which my DH's Grandad moved into with his Grandma. My FIL and his siblings were born here and lived here then Grandad bought the house off the council and when he died, my DH bought the house off the family.

Never thought about second hand houses before! I wonder if people move from new build to new build then so they always get a shiny new house?!

I have never heard of this .. So i would presume these people never buy things from antique shops, Ebay or heavens forbid, charity shops.. how very odd!

I have never seen a new build I would want to buy. They look a bit better on the outside these days but are generally characterless boxes inside - unless you are talking custom designed and built and extremely expensive. They are also usually on estates - can't bear estates.

I have bought :
an Edwardian terrace converted into two flats - huge rooms, fireplaces, massive bathroom and lovely old white suite.
an edwardian terraced house huge rooms, art nouveau stained glass
doors and fireplaces, high ceilings, lovely staircase, windows and
wooden floors. I loved it.
1930s semi- with DH. Loved it. Big garden, lovely features, big rooms, very big kitchen (15x14) and sitting room (21ft) plust 14x12 dining room. 2 large bedrooms (16x12) one box room (10x7)
1920 semi - now- 5 very large bedrooms (18x18) (20 x18) - smallest is 14x15, 3 big reception rooms, big kitchen/family room, 3 bathrooms, playroom, utility room, conservatory, large, wide hall, lovely staircase and windows, huge gardens, on a private road overlooking a park, fireplaces, architecturally interesting. We absolutely love it.
I just can't imagine living in a pokey modern house if I had a choice. Even ones that have a decent size room, have pokey rooms too.
But we have friends who don't like old houses at all and always buy new. Horses for courses I suppose.