We're a family of four in London, living in rented accommodation after selling our last property. We want to stay in a very specific area for work and school reasons. Our budget would currently get us a small ex-council house that has been very nicely extended and looked after but has two decent bedrooms and one small one. Doing the loft would be very expensive/difficult (which I think is why they are moving) - the design of the houses means that the ceilings have to be lowered to convert the lofts, so it's a huge job and very expensive, and the space you get is not huge.
Alternatively we could afford a bigger house with loads of potential but that is a total wreck and would need everything doing to it. I've been in the situation of living somewhere I couldn't afford to do up and it was grim so I don't want to be in that situation again but I think we'd be able to stay there forever. Option one feels safer as we would know what our mortgage and expenses were going to be up front but I'm worried that my DC (8 and 10) are about to become large teenagers and what works for us this year won't in three or four years time, plus there's literally no scope to change anything about how the house is and one of the DC will get a tiny box bedroom. We are all on top of one another in our rented flat so I can see space becoming an issue.
Because we're renting we wouldn't have to move into the wreck as it is; we could afford to put in a new IKEA type kitchen and bathroom without extending, do the heating and electrics and redecorate. The three bedrooms are more even in size and it's a nicer house with a bigger garden. It is, however, more expensive, and would cost more to fix up over time.
DH loves the wreck of a house, but would be happy with the smaller one. He is not the best at looking ahead though; I'm the forward planner...
Or we could just wait and hope prices come down so we can buy something else, I suppose. Does anyone have any experience of this? Regrets? Crystal ball?