AIBU - new build houses are AWFUL

[hooplahooper]

I am currently living in a BRAND NEW Bellway home - renting while I renovate my childhood home. I was excited to live in something new enough to be zero maintenance while dealing with my own big Reno project...

But holy HELL it's been an awful eye opener for me. I've lived in 11 houses across three countries as an adult - 5 of which I have owned + sold - and I have never come across such bad build quality before. Some of the (many) entry level issues (which the landlord has repeatedly
flagged with the builder to no avail) include:

• The walls aren't plastered, just painted plaster board - so zero internal sound insulation,
• the tiling is wonky in all rooms
• the windows don't seal,
• half the doors don't catch on the hinges without considered effort.
• the laminate kitchen counters aren't sealed at any joints
• the front door hinges are loose
• the electric car charge point doesn't turn on
• The stair railings aren't secure
• there is black mould everywhere from a leak (now stopped, but mould not attended to)

I'fe lived in new builds before overseas - I know there are always snags, but everything about this house feels like corners are cut + quality is compromised.

I'd let it go - I don't really care for me, I'm moving into my own home in 8 weeks - but I'm raging on behalf of my lovely + hard working neighbours here - who have got enormous mortgages on these poor quality structures.

I posted about it on my personal stories and have heard all sorts of even worse horror stories about new builds by Baratt Home, Persimmon + Taylor Wimpey as well. It seems universal that these huge developers are building low quality, parasitic dormitory towns on (often) greenbelt lane - and making astronomical profits from them (650m for Bellway last year..!)

With such gigantic profits - they could be building better quality homes if they wanted to. But they don't. And the government is clearly so caught up in meeting housing targets they are turning a blind eye.

I am RAGING. I am grateful I don't have to live here forever - and furious on behalf of the millions of people that deserve so much more.

YABU - let it go, they're not so bad you terrible snob. People are happy with their homes + can make their own judgements

YANBU - hard working people deserve more + there has to be a way of holding these big companies accountable for prioritising profit over quality homes

It’s not the truth. Imagination has nothing to do with the type of property you’ve bought. Both a newer house and an older house require imagination to make them into a home you love. There’s no rule book that says you must keep a new build the way you bought them.

Agree - lots of my neighbours have done brilliant things with their decor etc. zero judgement on the people that buy them. It’s the poor quality of the buildings + the fact that they are being built on fields when there are so many brownfield sites available. It’s just that building quality housing on brownfield sites has lower profit margins than chucking up track homes on open space…

This kind of shit is exactly the kind of judgemental pish I was referring to upthread.

I've got a bucketload of imagination. We started decorating as soon as we moved in because I absolutely didn't want to live in a white box. You're not more imaginative because you started with someone else's choice of decor rather than a blank canvas.

There's not a single beige wall in this house

It’s the poor quality of the buildings + the fact that they are being built on fields when there are so many brownfield sites available.

I've already mentioned this, but us local people have found it traumatising still that they've been built on fields and woods cleared. Notably a field called 'Rabbit Field' as I said. Some of the older children asked if the same thing happened to the rabbits as in Watership Down.

There were a few deer near the woods and we think they were moved but cannot find answers. We fought this but ultimately lost, and it felt futile, and now they've earmarked more fields to build something unnecessary, including more of these houses.

There are many brownfield sites available but the surroundings and area not so picturesque. Not to be cynical at all...

I also prefer brownfield construction, but NIMBIES find reasons to pout about development wherever you do it, unfortunately.

If you densify the suburbs by building more there, “What about pressure on local services, GP, hospitals, school?”(even though new inhabitants are also likely to work in/staff local services as well, and most primary schools have falling rolls).

If you build in inner city areas, it’s usually done by building UP and by building on things like car parks, and of course the new inner city residents will want their new living environment to be live able (cleaner air, more biking facilities), and then the people in the suburbs start to moan about congestion charges, about loss of parking spaces, about the new bike hangars and bike lanes narrowing the roads and making it harder to bring their car in etc, and whine about “monstrous towers ruining the skyline” and all that.

I think we need ALL of these types of developments. But NIMBIES gonna NIMBY, whatever you do!

I think this is true - people seem to object to every development. In densely populated areas there would be outcry if a developer stuck in a development of a handful of 5 bed detached houses on a plot which could hold dozens of 2/3 bed flats. In more rural areas there aren't always many brownfield sites to start with either.

And when developers build densely - maximising the use of land - then people criticise that.

Did you also decorate with crushed velvet?

Older houses will always be more superior. I’d never live on an estate with houses made from tissue boxes thanks.

@allthegoodgirlsgotohell in your opinion... fixed it for you 🙄

Thank you for confirming to all on the thread that you are just a goady arse.

All else being equal - same location, same space, similar layout (or the ability to make it so) and similar price then I prefer period properties too. I came from one. But around here they aren't equal. There are some nice period properties but they're generally in need of massive work, have rubbish layouts which are hard to improve without significant structural work and cost, or are on really busy roads with no parking. And they're more expensive to buy and significantly more expensive to run.

There's a lot more goes in to choosing a house than just perceived build quality.

No crushed velvet whatsoever. You don't walk through the doors of a new build and have a style transplant.

@allthegoodgirlsgotohell don't be so childish, it's dull.

To be honest I don't care about the argument about whether these new build houses are decorated tastefully, imaginatively or not.

What's really important is the environmental impact, loss of habitats and building on green field sites - mainly because it's easier than building on brownfield sites and often more picturesque location. It's all about money

I think your attitude is a lot more graceless than even the tackiest home decor, to be honest.

The latest local site they're building on is the habitat of the brown hare, newts, watervole, different bat species. More woodland lost and it's part of an ancient dyke. Similarly a field across the road - will all be new houses.

We're protesting but they've already got past the first stage.

I know we have a housing problem and the difficulties associated with building on brownfield but the extra effort should be taken to build there. It's really not a NIMBY thing, and I would say that part of the problem is the apathy and indifference of many locals who shrug and call it progress.

Sorry if I'm going on!

Or ... in my case... for people that can't afford a period property / older house and the bills and maintenance that come with them. You reek of arrogant privilege .

Not directed at greyombre : directed at pp

Oh and I have crushed velvet curtains and love them no matter what other people say 🤣

you sound jealous tbh.

I think in a lot of places the brownfield and greenfield sites are being used quite differently. The brownfields I can think of are almost all being used exclusively for flats - they tend to be fairly central with high land costs so the figures don't stack up to put houses on them. The exceptions I can think of have been a couple of very big sites (former hospitals or university campuses) although in those cases there was greenfield lost as thats where the original functions moved to.

There's also a ridiculous tendency here to fill up the brownfield sites without adequate consideration for the already full schools. It's like they can't imagine families in flats. It tends to be better on the greenfield developments where at least the bigger ones often come with a primary school

But then here there's also the issue that some of the brownfield sites are also incredible habitats (often because they've been left for so long that they've gone wild). I can think of several where development is being actively fought on this basis.

Not sure what the answer is.

Primary school rolls are falling in most parts of the UK; the current crop of Y7s who started last September were a bulge year, and it's pretty much a downward slope for all kids younger than that, so from next year onwards, secondary school numbers will also start to fall. They are starting to close and merge both private and state primary schools all over the place already, even in London. It's also important to remember that new inhabitants work in schools as well as sending their kids to them.

The UK could deal with building more easily if there was more of a culture of families living in (nice, family-friendly) flats in more down-town areas. There is no reason why the UK can't do this, but doing so will demand: 1) Looking at the way family-friendly flats are designed in European countries and learning from this; 2) A bit of a mindset change - so many Brits simply won't consider anything other than a house with its own garden: 3) Everyone being grown-up about the fact that housing more people in urban centers will inevitably impact those living in the suburbs as well.

I already talked about this a bit on the Ulez thread, but having people living like this in urban centers is only doable and pleasant if you also take steps to get a lot of the cars and pollution out of urban centers too (congestion charges, taking free parking away, devoting more road space to bike lanes, low emission zones, pedestrianizing larger swathes of the city center), not to mention the fact that new urban housing is often built on former car parks, and when you do this, a lot of suburbanites have tizzies because they can no longer easily drive their car into the center of town and park there.

I've just moved into a new build by the sea, from an inner city Victorian terrace.

Not sure what personality defects the pp on this thread think I have but I am very happy with my house.

My garden is small (I hate gardening, so this is a plus to me). We looked at comparable Victorian properties but for the budget we had we could only afford an overpriced renovation project. Not interested in that. Similar houses from the 80s and 90s needing redecoration were available for the same price as this one which we could pick the interiors. No brainer as they say.

They might be falling on average but the impact is extremely varied. For our city there are some schools where the roll is expected to fall off a cliff and others which are bursting at the seams, have no room to expand and large new developments are going on in those areas. Redrawing catchments is challenging and takes years.

I live in a new build by one of the developers you specifically mention. I live in a village and the planning department was pretty strict about the way they could build their houses.

I really like it, there was some minor snagging and it was all sorted. Unlike my friends who bought an older property only to find out the roof damage wasn't picked up in the survey and had to pay thousands to get it sorted.

I think people have bad and good experiences in pretty varied properties but I liked that I actually had a couple years of being able to call people to get stuff sorted without facing a bill. You couldn't move into a previously owned property and get then to replace your bathroom tiles because they were scratched.

Similarly the heating costs are at a fraction, all the electrics and insulation are up to code and I had all new appliances provided.

Well it is bad, obviously. But at least there's some recourse through after sales. Compared with several decades of dodgy DIY, literal papering over cracks, ancient plumbing and 'quirky' wiring that reduces even the most experienced trades to sorrowful head shakes and mumbles about 'obsolete parts'; with several hundred thousand of your cash in the hands of Joe "Never had a problem with the neighbours" Vendor, who you will never see again...I can see the attraction.

Fucking flat is like a sauna again. Feel like punching anyone who says we havent had a summer. If you expect people to live in flats you need to do something about the temps they get up to. Ive downed tools Im not lifting a finger in this