Much much bigger house but no as good area?

[Gravitygirl]

Hi

i posted a few weeks ago about selling our 3 bed flat in an excellent area and renting a house for the garden/space. We have put the flat on the market but DH doe snot want to get off property ladder and we are looking at what we can afford, where we live is surrounded by £1 million plus houses and some starting from £500k but still way way out of our price,however if we cross a busy a road we can afford a massive with huge potential to extend 3 bed semi for £300,000 . its just the area is no where near as nice and instead of nice shops and pleasant walking places it will be a bit more, get in your car to go out ish ( is anyone still following) i feel like we are taking a step back, but DH thinks we need to go were we can afford and get the space so desperately needed, even if that does compromise schools ( slightly)

Any thoughts on this? Space vs location?

I think it depends on whether you need the space or just want it.

If your family is expanding and you simply don't have enough space then it might be worth the compromise.

If, however, you simply want a bigger place, I personally would be more tempted to stay in the nicer area and compromise on space. Location location location as they say.

It also depends how often you use the nice shops and pleasant walking places on a daily basis. If you are going to have to drive to them every day then you may continually wish you had stayed there.

I'm assuming you can't extend your current 3 bed flat into loft or basement?

Location, location, location.....

I personally wouldn't move to a worse area just to get more space - we did that and moved again very shortly afterwards.

Location is important, but how much worse is the 'not as good' area?

For example, Walthamstow is not as nice as Wanstead, but is still absolutely fine.

No,i would never move to a not-so-nice area and i would never compromise on school quality.

But surely an area that has £300,000 houses is still a nice area? Would be round here (up north) anyway. I wouldn't move to an area that was full of shaven headed lads with Staffies on a bit of rope.

There's no way in a million years I'd do that. Nor would I compromise the school.

I'd stay where you are, tbh.

Everything is relative, though. What is it about the 'not as good' area that isn't as good?

TheFarSide I think I know where Gravitygirl is coming from... Where we were looking to buy, there is a 'triangle' bordered by two railways and a main road and most of the 'triangle' is a conservation area with excellent state primary schools and good transport links into London. In the 'conservation' area, the houses go from £450k upwards to a million. The moment you come out of their triangle and catchment of the good state primary schools, the house prices drop by about £200k for a similar house as the roads are not as nice and you are surrounded by state schools that are rated 3s and 4s... It's crazy but I totally see where she is coming from... :)

I moved from a one bed flat in an expensive London borough to a two bed house with a garden in another less expensive London Borough. I did have some reservations at the time at what felt like a backwards step, but I'm much happier where I am now. It all depends on a person's priorities - if it's about schools being less good and the OP feels strongly about schools then that may have to be the deciding factor.

Personally I wouldn't (and haven't) compromise schools to get more space. We chose to live in a really nice area with great schools, but the price we've paid is that we have a far smaller house than if we lived about 4 miles away. A possible compromise might be to wait until kids in good schools and then move out of catchment.

What do you mean by schools that aren't as good? If it's an ofsted view, I wouldn't be overly concerned - IMHO schools with intakes from less wealthy areas are often just as good (or better) than schools in wealthier areas - the former have to work harder to get good or even average results.