Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Property/DIY

Join our Property forum for renovation, DIY, and house selling advice.

Original poster

Central flat or house on the outskirts?

16 replies

SkaterGrrrrl · 14/03/2012 14:06

We are selling our 2 bedroom flat and looking to move somewhere bigger. We have an 18 MO and another one on the way.

We can afford a 3 bed flat in the area we are now ? but DH is wondering if we should move out a bit where we could afford a house.

Our neighbourhood is great and has lots of facilities and amenities, in estate agent parlance. Lovely shops, restaurants, cafes, good schools, parks, public swimming pool and sports facilities. A great place to bring up kids. We also have 5 or 6 friends living walking distance from us.

If we move out a bit, we could still access all of the above but it will be a drive or a longish bus ride away.

I?d be happy with a flat but DH thinks a house is better for kids and also he says he feels the family is safer sleeping upstairs at night.

So which would you do, Mumsnetters?

OP posts:
TheSecondComing · 14/03/2012 14:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

suburbandream · 14/03/2012 14:12

Does the flat have any outside space? If not I'd definitely say go for a house. When your DCs are bigger they will really benefit from a garden, plus the associated space to store things like bikes etc, and room for pets etc if they want them when they are bigger. Once they are at school they will get a whole new group of friends too so as long as the new area has good schools and easy school run then that would be my choice.

Blu · 14/03/2012 14:13

If you can find a spacious flat with some outdoor space that suits your needs, I would stay put - if your local primary is good.

Being within close walking distance of friends adds to the quality of life no-end, IMO. Even more noticably once they are visiting friends after school etc.

Original poster
SkaterGrrrrl · 14/03/2012 14:38

Thanks for the replies.

The flats we have been looking at mostly have gardens ? although there are several excellent parks nearby.

Is there anything inherently valuable / better about owning a house that I am missing? (I?m not English, DH is).

I realise noisy neighbours can be a problem in a flat ? but of course you could have noisy neighbours to the side in a house.

OP posts:
Blu · 14/03/2012 14:42

An enclosed garden you can step straight out into is completely different from going out to visit a park - with small children it is ideal to have both. To sit out in, have a small sand pit / water play / children play out while you are in the kitchen, have a BBQ, etc.

Original poster
SkaterGrrrrl · 14/03/2012 14:44

Hmmm... BBQ....

OP posts:
minipie · 14/03/2012 16:24

There are four main advantages houses have over flats:

  1. space - depends on what size the flat and house are, of course

  2. garden - but you can get flats with gardens

  3. noise. Noise from above is generally a lot worse than noise from the sides.

  4. freehold rather than leasehold. Most flats are leasehold which means you are at the landlord's mercy in terms of things like roof repairs, communal areas, expenses of any refurbs. Some flats are share of freehold which is much better in this respect, but only a few.

but having said all that, I think I would still choose a flat in an area I know and love and have friends, rather than a house in a new area I don't like as much. As long as you can get a garden and enough space in your flat.

GrandPoohBah · 14/03/2012 19:02

Even share of freehold properties are at the mercy of the directors of the FH company. With a house you wouldn't be paying service charges, and IME buildings insurance and a bit of external maintenance is a LOT cheaper than paying service charges and internals & externals as defined by the lease...

suburbandream · 15/03/2012 10:18

Our last flat was share of freehold - it generally worked fine because there were four flats in the house and we all agreed on things and got on well. However, eventually the other three owners rented out their flats and moved away, so we were the only ones living there. Which meant that if anything went wrong, the tenants would come and moan to us, and of course we were the ones who ended up fixing the problems because they affected us directly. The other owners were always fine with paying for repairs etc but we began to feel a bit like caretakers in the end. In my sister's flat (share of freehold again) there was one owner who always disagreed with the cost of maintenance etc and it was a nightmare, nothing got done. I much prefer finally having a house where we can just sort stuff out ourselves and not have any of the hassle of other people's problems.

sh77 · 15/03/2012 11:47

We considered whether a house on the outskirts would be better for us but as we had been in C London for 10 years, we couldn't face the transition as we love being central. We were lucky to have found a flat that met all our indoor and outdoor space requirements - 3 beds, basement storage, garden, park, quiet and safe. BUT the share of freehold is problematic - 5k service charge due to litigation with shareholders who do not pay their service charge. Normally, it would be 2k. The residents are getting annoyed and have come together to seek an end to it. We love our flat and are glad we did not move further out.

Blu · 15/03/2012 11:49

GrandPoohBear - depends. I bought a leasehold flat. The 5 of us in the block joined together and bought the freehold and we also created our own management company - only owners of the flat could be directors of the management company, and the management company owned the freehold - we all had an equal share in the management company. It worked really well. We paid an annual maintenance contribution into the Magt Co's account and jointly decided on a repairs and maintenance schedule, got best quote fo buildings insurance etc. No rip offs.

GrandPoohBah · 15/03/2012 14:06

Oh, I don't disagree Blu, and that set up works well in small blocks where it's all owner occupied and everyone's prepared to get involved, but that really is the exception rather than the norm - particularly with the proliferation of BTL absentee landlords. And if it does go wrong, even having the freehold doesn't really give you many powers of enforcement despite the fact that the lease clearly states the contractual obligation of the lessee. And it ends up costing everyone a lot of money.

GrandPoohBah · 15/03/2012 14:07

Oh, I didn't mean that you would necessarily get ripped off - just that I think it's cheaper, especially with larger blocks, to run a house than pay service charges.

takeonboard · 15/03/2012 14:15

We chose a flat in central London over a house in the suburbs and there are certainly pro's and cons with both you just have to weigh up what is important to you. I don't know anyone whose property/location choice ticks all their boxes, there is always a compromise.

For us time spent commuting/travelling is time wasted so being in zone 1 is important, a large garden is less important with Hyde Park on the doorstep but I know that for lots of other people space is far more important than time.......its a tough one!

Blu · 15/03/2012 14:19

GPB - I agree, I would steer clear of large blocks and high service charges - better to put that high overhead into paying your mortgage! Also, I chaired our mgt co and there were some tense inter-neighbour moments!

GrandPoohBah · 15/03/2012 16:02

Ah, I'm a property manager so I get to deal with them instead Grin Stand up fights at AGMs are always my favourite...

I am a bit biased. I wouldn't buy a flat, I've dealt with too many management companies!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page