Getting ahead of myself here solve I haven't yet got figures from the builder, but the house we're looking at needs work. It's marketed at the home report valuation (Scotland) but this failed to account for the asbestos in the roof, and houses here are routinely being overvalued by the EA, as evidence by our own recent sale and the constant reductions on Rightmove, so we are likely to offer under. Anyway, we could put a 27% deposit against it but since it needs work we will probably only put 7% down (if we can get it for under the valuation, assuming mortgage valuation agrees, which I know is anyone's guess, then the % deposit would be greater) and spend the rest on the central heating, rewiring, sorting roofing and insulation then commence decoration with what's left.
My question is that obviously I'm tempted by a long fixed rate, but in this case the house is likely to be worth significantly following the work, and so a remortgage afterwards seems sensible. In addition, it could benefit from an extension eventually, in which case we would probably look to release equity to carry this out provided the value hadn't bombed. So my question is would you grab a long fix while you can, or in this situation does it make more sense to go for a more flexible mortgage product?