I looked at the house again this morning and definitely do not like it.
The putting the bath in a bedroom is straight out of a country house / boutique hotel playbook. But those are places to stay temporarily, not to live, and the appeal is that the idea is novel. The en-suite in the principal bedroom does not have a door. And the taps in the bathroom are separated hot and cold, a pet dislike of mine.
And the weird bunkbed situation in the hallway is clever but not terribly practical. Anyone sleeping there would be disturbed by light and noise as the only barrier between the beds and the rest of the hallway is a curtain. Where is the person supposed to keep their clothes? There is no cupboard or chest of drawers.
The bedroom in the lower ground floor strikes me as somewhere a live-in staff member would sleep but there is no sitting room or kitchen facility on that floor so I am not sure how much it would appeal. And the so-called 'gym' on the top floor is just a place to lift weights for upper body strength as there are no other gym facilities there.
And the lack of parking? Not terribly practical. Yes, I know the statistics about car ownership in London but drill further down into the statistics and I am sure that the higher up the socio-economic status a household is, the more likely they are to own a car.
And there are urns everywhere.