Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Property/DIY

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

Poor in a lovely house, or comfortable in a so-so house? WWYD?

96 replies

theyoungvisiter · 19/06/2010 14:13

So we are house buying at the moment, and there are two houses we are looking at.

One is well within our budget and ticks our boxes, but somehow just doesn't have that "x" factor that makes your heart sing. On the other hand, we could do it up nicely, and get someone in to do the boring work for us.

The other is at the outside edge of our budget and a wreck, so would swallow all our disposable income (and time) for the foreseeable future. We would have to do almost all the work ourselves as there won't be much left in the budget for professional help. However it is (or could be) a lovely house, the kind of place I have always wanted, and more practically, it should be a great return on our investment after we put the time in.

So my question is, wwyd? Eat beans and sand floorboards in the lovely house, or quaff wine and laze in the so-so house?

OP posts:
Leslaki · 19/06/2010 14:15

lovely house!

Pootles2010 · 19/06/2010 14:16

I'd go with the so-so house - purely because of the way things are with the economy/cuts, i think economic stability is so very important right now - you have to be able to look after yourself because the government can't.

tutu100 · 19/06/2010 14:16

Lovely house. I'd much rather been poor in a house I loved rather than ok in something that didn't fulfill my dreams.

mustrunmore · 19/06/2010 14:17

When I read the title, I was going to 100% say comfortable in a so so house.
But now I've read your details, I just dont know. You've made it sound like the cheaper house is a horrible bland boxy 70s with nothing redeeming about it. If its like that, and the nice one is a beautiful gothic gatehouse, then eat beans and revel in the loveliness.

thighsmadeofcheddar · 19/06/2010 14:17

definitely poor in the lovely house. We just(yesterday) moved out of a comfortable house into one that will stretch us. Day 2 and I'm already loving it here.

Sonilaa · 19/06/2010 14:17

comfortable house

RuthieCohen · 19/06/2010 14:17

Are you the wistful type who would always think "I'd be happy if only we'd bought that perfect house?" I expect you're much more practical and you know really that you can be just as happy in the cheaper one. Do it up to your heart's content and feel smug when interest rates go up knowing that you'd be up shit creek if you'd been up to the hilt on a bigger mortgage.

now crack open that vino.

tutu100 · 19/06/2010 14:18

But DP and I have never had the money to pay people to do stuff for us so we would never be put off by having to do work ourselves.

orienteerer · 19/06/2010 14:19

The one that needs doing up, better investment.

narmada · 19/06/2010 14:25

Depends how much of stretch the nice one would be, how secure your jobs are and how much you value things other than your home (holidays, going out, having a cash cushion). If it's any comfort, we are looking for houses at the moment and facing similar dilemma. But I think we are tending more and more to more affordable and some spare cash for things like extra childcare (we have no family close by!) and the odd holiday.....

Hope you're happy whatever you decide. It's such a stress, buying houses.

theyoungvisiter · 19/06/2010 14:32

oo interesting!! Complete split - just like my heart

No I am not a wistful type, I'm very practical. But home is very important to me, and it seems weird to spend such a huge chunk of cash on a place I'm not that passionate about.

The so-so house is not a 70s box, nor is the lovely house a gothic gatehouse! (Swoon! I wish )

Basically they are very similar houses, both are turn-of-the-century victorian terraces. But one is very small and we would not have much more space than we do now, so we'd probably have to move again in a few years when the kids are bigger. It's also lost most of it's period features.

The other is much bigger and has lots of period features left (basically because it hasn't been decorated for 40 years!) but the only reason we can afford it is that it's in such a state. I am completely seduced by its potential though - and the huge house that we could have when we were finished. We'd never have to move again which is an enticing thought!

Both are within our budget and leave a margin of safety in terms of the mortgage (I'm incredibly cautious about debt!) so I'm not worried about the mortgage on the lovely house. It's more that ALL our income would be swallowed up in new windows, new roof, new kitchen etc etc. And if we couldn't afford it, we'd end up having to live with 70s hideousness for many years .

Tutu - sadly DH and I have never been able to afford anyone to do up our houses either! So lying back and letting a pro do the decorating would definitely be a new experience for us too!!

OP posts:
Earlybird · 19/06/2010 14:32

'A wreck of a house' can be a budgetary 'black hole'.

There is always more to be done than you think, and things always cost more than you estimate. Sure, you/dh can sand floors and paint walls but on such a tight budget, how would you manage major repairs (the kind that are structural or require a professional - roof, electrical wiring, plumbing, etc)? Also, a 'wreck of a house' presumably hasn't been well maintained, so there are bound to be big/expensive jobs looming.

And, are you really willing to forego holidays, meals out, etc - all the small things that make life pleasurable/fun? Do you really want to spend all your spare time/cash on doing up a house?

What happens if you/dh are made redundant, or get ill? What if you fall pregnant?

No way would I put myself/my family in such a precarious position - especially not in this economy.

In your shoes, I'd either keep looking for a more appealing house well within your budget or would buy the less appealing house 'for now' and live in it a few years and then move to a lovely house when you can properly afford it.

janeite · 19/06/2010 14:32

I'd always stay well within budget, personally. Also I am far too lazy/stupid to do a load of work on a house myself!

Earlybird · 19/06/2010 14:35

Also - interest rates will start rising at some point, and you could be in a real financial bind when that happens if you've stretched yourselves.

Jojay · 19/06/2010 14:44

The comfortable house. Having some disposble income left for holidays, treats etc is much more fun than spending it all on bags of plaster and grout.

Jojay · 19/06/2010 14:45

And the amount of time that doing up a wreck swallows up would put me off, regardless of cash.

Pre kids, yes, now, no way.

MegBusset · 19/06/2010 14:50

I don't see why you would spend thousands of pounds to move somewhere with hardly more space than you have now, and that you will have to move out of (costing more thousands) within a few years. Partic if you have to pay stamp duty with every move. Seems a false economy to me.

tigerbear · 19/06/2010 14:54

The lovely house!!!

It sounds like you could def make money on this if you ever had to sell (but from what you say it is likely to be your 'forever house'), while the other one you might not make much from when you have to move again anyway in a few years. Yes, it's a risk in the current economic climate, but then there's always risk with everything.

DH and I bought our flat 5 years ago and it was £50k over our original budget - risky, however we bought in the very best area we could afford, and with a bit of work we could prob sell it for a more than a £100k more than we bought it for (even in this climate). No regrets at all

theyoungvisiter · 19/06/2010 14:57

Meg - the problem is that we can't stay where we are - we're in a 2 bed flat with no storage and are literally bursting at the seams. So we have to move somewhere.

The new house would have 3 bedrooms either way so would be slightly better in that respect. But in the smaller house the rooms are all smaller, so we would be swapping our big airy living room/bed room for a small boxy one.

But yes, your point is one that we're wondering too. Do we do 2 small easy hops but lose a lot of money on stamp duty in the process, or 1 big stretch which should save us money in the long run.

OP posts:
williewalshsballs · 19/06/2010 15:08

lovely house. deffo
but then i would sacrifice anything for my home

tigerbear · 19/06/2010 15:09

OP we need to see photos of each house - property porn!!! Then we can decide for you!

ninedragons · 19/06/2010 15:16

If you buy the lovely house, make sure you get a top-notch structural survey done.

brimfull · 19/06/2010 15:19

go with the house you love , the one you will enjoy doing up because you will be there forever
I regret that we didnt do this yrs ago.

noddyholder · 19/06/2010 15:21

Do some sums regarding what the renovation will cost and then double it and see if you can cope with that.Don't assume it will rocket in value with whats to come economically Prices are more likely to fall under this gove than at any other time so make sure you lovel it and can afford it if your circumstances change.If you have no financial probs go with the one you love esp if its long term.

noddyholder · 19/06/2010 15:22

BTW I did the compromise a few years ago and sold it after a year

Swipe left for the next trending thread