UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
mark al
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with interest.
  #2   Report Post  
enuff
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"mark al" wrote in message
om...
im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with interest.


Having owned both brand new and old I would now go for older properties. IMO
the main advantages are that they tend to be on larger plots, have larger
rooms and in many instances more substantially built which in theory makes
things like loft conversions easier etc. Also larger plots mean more room
around you, more privacy and space to "expand" with extensions at a later
date. Because of this potential I also think they are a better investment
financially. On top of this (if you can find an unmolested one) they offer
more character than most new builds.

The disadvantages will depend of the individual property. Our last one
needed rewiring, central heating, new kitchen and bath plus redecoration.
Something most "older" houses need at some point in their lives. A newer
house may not need any of these. Also IME older houses need ongoing
maintenance to stop them declining, newer houses less so.

In short older houses will cost money at some point, in all likelyhood more
than a new one. But if you buy carefully, make sure you are aware of what
you're getting into and use a good surveyor I'd go with an old house every
time.

HTH


  #3   Report Post  
Angela
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"enuff" wrote in message
...

"mark al" wrote in message
om...
im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions,

advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house

as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with

interest.

Having owned both brand new and old I would now go for older

properties. IMO
the main advantages are that they tend to be on larger plots, have

larger
rooms and in many instances more substantially built which in

theory makes
things like loft conversions easier etc. Also larger plots mean

more room
around you, more privacy and space to "expand" with extensions at a

later
date. Because of this potential I also think they are a better

investment
financially. On top of this (if you can find an unmolested one)

they offer
more character than most new builds.

The disadvantages will depend of the individual property. Our last

one
needed rewiring, central heating, new kitchen and bath plus

redecoration.
Something most "older" houses need at some point in their lives. A

newer
house may not need any of these. Also IME older houses need ongoing
maintenance to stop them declining, newer houses less so.

In short older houses will cost money at some point, in all

likelyhood more
than a new one. But if you buy carefully, make sure you are aware

of what
you're getting into and use a good surveyor I'd go with an old

house every
time.

HTH


I absolutely agree. Much will depend on if you will have any spare
cash or whether you are pushing yourself to the financial limit. If
it's the former then buy and old house for all the good reasons
above, if it's the latter then new is best so you wont have any
maintenance expenditure

Good luck

Angela


  #4   Report Post  
Peter Parry
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

On 7 Jan 2004 09:51:09 -0800, (mark al) wrote:

im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.


Older houses tend to be bigger and have more land associated with
them. That ends all the good points.

Of their age they are usually amongst the better examples (the rest
having fallen down /been demolished). However, foundations on all
old houses are decidedly iffy, build standards were universally poor,
insulation is a joke and things like plumbing, heating and
electricity will have been bodged over the years to varying standards
of incompetence. Whatever you do avoid the ones that have been
"improved" by surface bodge jobs and several cans of National Trust
Burnt Sienna paint. Remember if you buy a crock the loss will be
yours - surveyors learned how to avoid all responsibility years ago
and buildings insurance policies exclude "faulty workmanship" (which
basically means anything at all other than gross subsidence).

New houses (last few years) are built to higher standards (by poorer
craftsmen) and if "estate" types (Barret et al) are designed to meet
their odd perception of peoples requirements. If theirs and your
match you are OK, if not you have a problem. The worst houses, to be
avoided at all costs, are those built between about 1960 and 1985.
Dire standards and poor materials.

Best is buy the land and have a house built for you. Its also
usually cheaper and quicker.

--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/
  #6   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"enuff" wrote in message
...

"mark al" wrote in message
om...
im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with interest.


Having owned both brand new and old I would now go for older properties.

IMO
the main advantages are that they tend to be on larger plots, have larger
rooms and in many instances more substantially built which in theory makes
things like loft conversions easier etc. Also larger plots mean more room
around you, more privacy and space to "expand" with extensions at a later
date. Because of this potential I also think they are a better investment
financially. On top of this (if you can find an unmolested one) they offer
more character than most new builds.

The disadvantages will depend of the individual property. Our last one
needed rewiring, central heating, new kitchen and bath plus redecoration.
Something most "older" houses need at some point in their lives. A newer
house may not need any of these. Also IME older houses need ongoing
maintenance to stop them declining, newer houses less so.

In short older houses will cost money at some point, in all likelyhood

more
than a new one. But if you buy carefully, make sure you are aware of what
you're getting into and use a good surveyor I'd go with an old house

every
time.


Large new houses are available. They also have far higher insulation levels
making them more comfortable in summer and winter.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003


  #7   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jan 2004 09:51:09 -0800, (mark al) wrote:

im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.


Older houses tend to be bigger and have more land associated with
them. That ends all the good points.

Of their age they are usually amongst the better examples (the rest
having fallen down /been demolished). However, foundations on all
old houses are decidedly iffy, build standards were universally poor,
insulation is a joke and things like plumbing, heating and
electricity will have been bodged over the years to varying standards
of incompetence. Whatever you do avoid the ones that have been
"improved" by surface bodge jobs and several cans of National Trust
Burnt Sienna paint. Remember if you buy a crock the loss will be
yours - surveyors learned how to avoid all responsibility years ago
and buildings insurance policies exclude "faulty workmanship" (which
basically means anything at all other than gross subsidence).

New houses (last few years) are built to higher standards (by poorer
craftsmen) and if "estate" types (Barret et al) are designed to meet
their odd perception of peoples requirements. If theirs and your
match you are OK, if not you have a problem. The worst houses, to be
avoided at all costs, are those built between about 1960 and 1985.
Dire standards and poor materials.


Wow! You spoke much sense. Amazing, taking all those sensible ills.

Best is buy the land and have a house built for you. Its also
usually cheaper and quicker.


Not always the case and finding decent plot is very difficult.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003


  #8   Report Post  
I J H
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"Angela" wrote in message
...

"enuff" wrote in message
...

"mark al" wrote in message
om...
im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions,

advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house

as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with

interest.

Having owned both brand new and old I would now go for older

properties. IMO
the main advantages are that they tend to be on larger plots, have

larger
rooms and in many instances more substantially built which in

theory makes
things like loft conversions easier etc. Also larger plots mean

more room
around you, more privacy and space to "expand" with extensions at a

later
date. Because of this potential I also think they are a better

investment
financially. On top of this (if you can find an unmolested one)

they offer
more character than most new builds.

The disadvantages will depend of the individual property. Our last

one
needed rewiring, central heating, new kitchen and bath plus

redecoration.
Something most "older" houses need at some point in their lives. A

newer
house may not need any of these. Also IME older houses need ongoing
maintenance to stop them declining, newer houses less so.

In short older houses will cost money at some point, in all

likelyhood more
than a new one. But if you buy carefully, make sure you are aware

of what
you're getting into and use a good surveyor I'd go with an old

house every
time.

HTH


I absolutely agree. Much will depend on if you will have any spare
cash or whether you are pushing yourself to the financial limit. If
it's the former then buy and old house for all the good reasons
above, if it's the latter then new is best so you wont have any
maintenance expenditure

Good luck

Angela



All the above are vaild, but if you are a first time buyer then i guess
money will be pretty tight. In which case you may be better off with a new
property which doesn't need anything other than cosmetic changes to get it
how you want it.


  #9   Report Post  
dg
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

Generally you buy a house to live in and not to marvel at the architecture.
What is wrong with a pre or post war semi, or a modern 60/70/80/90's house?

You buy the one with the rooms the right size for you, an appropriate
kitchen and bathroom layout, enough room to move about, and future
development adaptation potential etc etc.

Any older house will generally have more maintenance costs. But over the
period you plan to keep it you have to decide whether the £20k new house
'premium' is more than the cost of maintaining your older house. You could
buy an old house with all the maintenance done by the previous owner - so
maintenance free for the next 15 years.

Then you have to consider your day to day running costs - heating and power
supply and if the plaster will fall off your older walls everytime you
re-decorate. New hose generally cheaper to run, but again is the premium
more than you will spend on heating?

For any house, if it is structurally sound then your only real concerns are
location, access, living space and running costs. Any house from any period
has a general design style - if that style and layout is appealing to you
then that is the type of house you buy. You should not buy it just because
it is 'victorian' or 'modern'.

dg


"mark al" wrote in message
om...
im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with interest.


  #10   Report Post  
Capitol
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


Peter Parry wrote in message ...
The worst houses, to be
avoided at all costs, are those built between about 1960 and 1985.
Dire standards and poor materials.


This bit I wouldn't agree with. If you are planning to stay for some years,
this is the period which can offer traditional cavity wall construction,
reasonable plot sizes, good wiring and plumbing, central heating designed
in, large windows and with a bit of cash are very easy to bring up to a good
standard.
Regards
Capitol




  #11   Report Post  
Michael Chare
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

"enuff" wrote in message
...

"mark al" wrote in message
om...
im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with interest.


Having owned both brand new and old I would now go for older properties. IMO
the main advantages are that they tend to be on larger plots, have larger
rooms and in many instances more substantially built which in theory makes
things like loft conversions easier etc. Also larger plots mean more room
around you, more privacy and space to "expand" with extensions at a later
date. Because of this potential I also think they are a better investment
financially. On top of this (if you can find an unmolested one) they offer
more character than most new builds.


May also have a better location, e.g. closer to station

The disadvantages will depend of the individual property. Our last one
needed rewiring, central heating, new kitchen and bath plus redecoration.
Something most "older" houses need at some point in their lives. A newer
house may not need any of these. Also IME older houses need ongoing
maintenance to stop them declining, newer houses less so.


Thats what you need DIY skills for. You can fit things that you like rather than
having to live with something someone else has chosen.

In short older houses will cost money at some point, in all likelyhood more
than a new one.


Quite possibly you will be able to recover any expenditure in a higher resale
price

Michael Chare


  #14   Report Post  
Dave Plowman
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

In article ,
Peter Parry wrote:
The worst houses, to be avoided at all costs, are those built between
about 1960 and 1985. Dire standards and poor materials.


I'd second that. I've a few pals that live in a nearby Barrets estate that
was built in the late '80s. They weren't cheap because of the location -
about the same as a Victorian cottage in the same area.

All the windows and external doors have had to be replaced. Boilers also -
although due to the excellent insulation they're hardly needed. Floors in
bathrooms and kitchens - untreated chipboard sitting on polystyrene, so
any spilt water that gets to it ruins it. Water system with a header tank
in the bathroom rather than roof void, so no possibility of a shower
without re-plumbing. Plasterboard with no skim - so just try taking off
wallpaper. All the front pathways now an obstacle course. Rear fences
rotten - if they didn't get blown down. And the most stupid positioning of
light switches and sockets you've ever seen. Poor sound insulation in the
flats, although the houses aren't too bad. Oh - and all the garage doors
have needed replacing too.

And they're tiny inside. Sod the low heating costs - I'll stick to my
space - and a house that's simple to fix as needed.

--
*When you've seen one shopping centre you've seen a mall.*

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn
  #18   Report Post  
Andrew
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

"dg" wrote in message ...

Any older house will generally have more maintenance costs. But over the
period you plan to keep it you have to decide whether the £20k new house
'premium' is more than the cost of maintaining your older house. You could
buy an old house with all the maintenance done by the previous owner - so
maintenance free for the next 15 years.


Where do you get the idea that any house, new or old, can be
maintenance free for 15 years? That's why there are so many crap,
poorly maintained, houses on the market.
  #19   Report Post  
ANt
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

With an old house, chips in paintwork, rough edges, pipes running down
the wall all seem to look nice ! In a new house, if the finish isn't
perfect, it's going to look pretty poor. I've not seen many new houses
where the finish has been acceptible, never mind perfect.

Personally I don't like walls that flex when you lean on them...scares
me. And I prefer to have an individual house...something I've not seen
on a new development (apart from at christmas when your nextdoor
neighbour covers his house with lights :-) )

Friends have made a packet out of buying new builds off plan..but I
get the impression you need to sell quick and be prepared to move
frequently to do that...before the next phase of development on the
estate downgrades your house to "the older style of build".

Friends of mine live in a 20yr new house...I don't think the argument
that old houses suffer from years of bodged surface jobs flies judging
by the things they've found.

Anyone know what the design life of new builds is nowadays ? probably
depends on the developer I know, but I heard 50yrs is what they're
designing to now..

I'd always go for an old house...but things to check
1) open the kitchen cupboards like I didn't. THe carcasses were half
the size of the doors :-)
2) Get an electrical check done. It's like 30-50 quid.
3) Take a look around the house perimeter and look for the damp proof
course and whether any patios/next door neighbours are bridging it. If
it is bridged, you can rectify easily, but the plaster may already be
damaged.
4) pick at the mortar whilst your walking around...is it crumbling ?
5) knock every single wall inside with your knuckle from the bottom to
the top. If the plasteres blown, that'll make redecorating difficult,
messy, and a longer job.
6) get into the loft and look around the chimney stack inside...any
damp getting in ? Any light showing through ?
7) try to open all the windows and check the outside sills especially
in corners..any rot ?
8) check that there's guttering all the way around the house...drive
past when it's raining if you can ! that'll show you if/were water is
dripping and you can go back and check those walls more closely.
9) look at the consumer unit...how many fuses in there ? if there's 4,
then that'll be the two ring mains and two lighting circuits...where's
any external floodlighting being powered from ? what kitchen
appliances are plugged into sharing that ring main ? There's likely to
be some new wiring required if you plan to refurb the kitchen.
10) look at drainage..where does all the water from the roof end up ?
any patios/surfaces slooping towards the house ? any drainage betwen
the surface and the house ?

Once you're happy with all of that...or you have assessed the cost to
rectify..you can make your offer....that way you shouldn't need to
lower the offer too much more once the surveyors been in (assuming he
doesn't find something major) risking losing the property after you've
paid up for a survey..

Ant.
  #20   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"dg" wrote in message

...

Any older house will generally have more maintenance costs. But over the
period you plan to keep it you have to decide whether the £20k new house
'premium' is more than the cost of maintaining your older house. You

could
buy an old house with all the maintenance done by the previous owner -

so
maintenance free for the next 15 years.


Newer house are more in demand in some areas, hence the higher price for
them. Owners know they are relatively trouble free and cheap to keep warm.
They tend to come with utility rooms and proper plumbing and electrical
systems, not bodged up and added to over years stuff.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 02/01/2004




  #21   Report Post  
Andrew
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

"Capitol" wrote in message ...
Peter Parry wrote in message ...
The worst houses, to be
avoided at all costs, are those built between about 1960 and 1985.
Dire standards and poor materials.


This bit I wouldn't agree with. If you are planning to stay for some years,
this is the period which can offer traditional cavity wall construction,
reasonable plot sizes, good wiring and plumbing, central heating designed
in, large windows and with a bit of cash are very easy to bring up to a good
standard.
Regards
Capitol


Agreed. Some of the best houses are those built in this period. Find a
property built in the 60's or 70's by a local independent builder with
a good reputation. OK, you may pay a premium and the wiring, windows
and heating system may be at the end of their life (depending how well
they've been maintained, or not) but the basic infrastructure will be
such that it's worth spending money on.
  #22   Report Post  
Andrew
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

"Capitol" wrote in message ...
Peter Parry wrote in message ...
The worst houses, to be
avoided at all costs, are those built between about 1960 and 1985.
Dire standards and poor materials.


This bit I wouldn't agree with. If you are planning to stay for some years,
this is the period which can offer traditional cavity wall construction,
reasonable plot sizes, good wiring and plumbing, central heating designed
in, large windows and with a bit of cash are very easy to bring up to a good
standard.
Regards
Capitol


Agreed. Some of the best houses are those built in this period. Find a
property built in the 60's or 70's by a local independent builder with
a good reputation. OK, you may pay a premium and the wiring, windows
and heating system may be at the end of their life (depending how well
they've been maintained, or not) but the basic infrastructure will be
such that it's worth spending money on.
  #23   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

"ANt" wrote in message
om...

With an old house, chips in paintwork, rough edges, pipes running down
the wall all seem to look nice ! In a new house, if the finish isn't
perfect, it's going to look pretty poor. I've not seen many new houses
where the finish has been acceptible, never mind perfect.

Personally I don't like walls that flex when you lean on them...scares
me.


I have not come across a new house where this is the case.

And I prefer to have an individual house...something I've not seen
on a new development (apart from at christmas when your nextdoor
neighbour covers his house with lights :-) )


It you want a truly "individual" house then selfbuild, it is the only way.
I see many new developments with "many" differing types of house styles.
The same type of boxes went in the 1970s estate. Not any more.

Friends have made a packet out of buying new builds off plan..but I
get the impression you need to sell quick and be prepared to move
frequently to do that...before the next phase of development on the
estate downgrades your house to "the older style of build".


The older houses on a development tend to go for more, as they streets are
tarmaced and gardens are more mature, and no mud.

Friends of mine live in a 20yr new house...I don't think the argument
that old houses suffer from years of bodged surface jobs flies judging
by the things they've found.

Anyone know what the design life of new builds is nowadays ? probably
depends on the developer I know, but I heard 50yrs is what they're
designing to now..


Victorian house were speculative and only had a design life of about 50
years too. Every torn away some of the facade of Victorian houses? Bodgers
were there then too.

I'd always go for an old house...but things to check


I've go a new, but I would check the reputation of the builder and check the
build as it goes up. Each snag you see give to the site manger and BCO, and
don't take crap off them as you are paying for it. Check that cavities have
no snots inside and that all the blockwork is fitted and cut properly with a
saw and tight fitting. Check that the joists resting on the blocks have
enough cement around them to seal it up, otherwise cold air fro the cavity
will enter the floor space. Check that any plastic pipes are clipped well;
they need to be. The rest is general stuff such as finishing.




---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 02/01/2004


  #24   Report Post  
Toby
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

IMM wrote:
it. Check that cavities have no snots inside and that all the
blockwork is fitted and cut properly with a saw and tight fitting.
Check that the joists resting on the blocks have enough cement around
them to seal it up, otherwise cold air fro the cavity will enter the
floor space. Check that any plastic pipes are clipped well; they


Erm how?
Identify an unbuilt house and go there every day while they build it?
Then tell them they aren't doing a good enough job?

--
Toby.

'One day son, all this will be finished'


  #25   Report Post  
Dave Plowman
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

In article ,
IMM wrote:
Newer house are more in demand in some areas, hence the higher price for
them.


It would depend on the older housing stock. If it's all back to back
terraces built next to th'pit, I can understand the preference for a new
house.

However, if it's good Victorian or Edwardian stock built in a decent part
of town it will be closer to the amenities than some faceless new house
built on a flood plain or other land that nobody else wants.

Owners know they are relatively trouble free and cheap to keep warm.
They tend to come with utility rooms and proper plumbing and electrical
systems, not bodged up and added to over years stuff.


--
*I'll try being nicer if you'll try being smarter

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn


  #26   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"Toby" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:
it. Check that cavities have no snots inside and that all the
blockwork is fitted and cut properly with a saw and tight fitting.
Check that the joists resting on the blocks have enough cement around
them to seal it up, otherwise cold air fro the cavity will enter the
floor space. Check that any plastic pipes are clipped well; they


Erm how?
Identify an unbuilt house and go there every day while they build it?


If you can. Go at least twice a week

Then tell them they aren't doing a good enough job?


That is the idea. make a snag list and send it to the BCO, if you are
afraid to upset the site manager. Remember! You are paying for it.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 02/01/2004


  #27   Report Post  
Witchy
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

On 7 Jan 2004 09:51:09 -0800, (mark al) wrote:

im just about to buy my first house and would like opinions, advice etc
what are the pros and cons of buying a victorian/edwardian house as
oppposed to buying a new house.any views will be read with interest.


Having been in far too many 'estate' type houses (friends etc) we'd
personally never buy a new-ish house because the rooms are too small
or impractical and if you're downstairs you can hear someone fart
upstairs. My sister's house is about 20 years old and it's an awful
plasterboard/chipboard job, even into the garage. When someone's in
the main bedroom they sound like they're about to come through the
floor!

We're currently in a house built in 1886, and the only thing I don't
like about it is the floors on the top floor all have a little too
much spring for my liking. Oh, and the whole building shakes when
trucks thunder past on the main road and hit the pothole convieniently
outside the front gate.

This one is definitely not a first time buyer's house unless you're
either very practical or have a lot of spare cash - when we bought it
it had dry rot, wet rot, weevil infestation, rising damp (in only 1
room!), no heating, no electric or lights on the top floor and
considerable water damage from an obvious constantly leaky roof
including grass growing above the bathroom ceiling!

The only non-loadbearing wall had been built AFTER the ground floor
floor had been installed and it wasn't supported by anything, so years
of water penetration at the front of the house had caused the nails
and wood holding it to the bricks to rot and its own weight made it
sag and buckle the living room and hall floors.

The first building inspector nearly shat when he saw it

And we still bought it, purely because it had massive amounts of
character and space, and none of the damage was irrepairable over
time.

Things that still need doing: repair all sash windows and replace
****ty plastic ones with proper sashes. Fix the aforementioned wall
properly (it's shored up on bricks now). Repair rest of water damage.
Finish renovating the dining room when it's not full of old computers.
Hope the ceiling doesn't come down! Repair all rotten wood in the
porch. Finish summerhouse that had been allowed to almost completely
rot away. Fit proper window in the room I'm in now. Renovate and
probably replaster top floor landing, and repair cracks caused by
heating the house properly for the first time. Rewire ground floor so
everything isn't surface mounted.

Of course, not all Victorian houses have suffered this sort of
neglect, but if all of the above doesn't put you off go Victorian.
Apart from anything else this place is now worth 4 times what we paid
for it D My sister's isn't.
--
cheers,

witchy/binarydinosaurs
  #28   Report Post  
Andrew Gabriel
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

In article ,
"IMM" writes:

Victorian house were speculative and only had a design life of about 50
years too. Every torn away some of the facade of Victorian houses? Bodgers
were there then too.


******** is the term which springs to mind.

The design life of most houses built from the Victorian era through
to the early 1960's (excluding some council prefab constructions) was
200 years. Due to the way buildings were purchased, it had to be
significantly more than 99 years, or they would only command leasehold
equivalent sale values.

With the relative increase in proportion of value of the plot over the
building since 1960's in some locations at least, this is perhaps less of
an issue today, but I'm still amazed people pay top freehold prices for
new homes whose life expectancy would appear to be less than the point
where you start depreciating a leasehold value due to impending end of
lease.

Still, while the developers can get away with it and no one seems to
have noticed, I suppose you can hardly blame them ;-)

--
Andrew Gabriel
  #29   Report Post  
Dave Plowman
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

In article ,
Toby wrote:
Erm how?
Identify an unbuilt house and go there every day while they build it?
Then tell them they aren't doing a good enough job?


Sounds like IMM to me.

--
*Failure is not an option. It's bundled with your software.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn
  #30   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"IMM" writes:

Victorian house were speculative and only had a design life of about 50
years too. Every torn away some of the facade of Victorian houses?

Bodgers
were there then too.


******** is the term which springs to mind.

The design life of most houses built from the Victorian era through
to the early 1960's (excluding some council prefab constructions) was
200 years.


What? The Victorians only had foundations a foot thick or so. Yes, they
made em to last. Sure they did! Most have been pulled down, with only the
those that by luck, or being slightly better built, surviving.

The term Jerry Built, was from a Victorina builder named Jerry Bros.




---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 02/01/2004




  #31   Report Post  
The Natural Philosopher
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

Andrew wrote:

"dg" wrote in message ...


Any older house will generally have more maintenance costs. But over the
period you plan to keep it you have to decide whether the £20k new house
'premium' is more than the cost of maintaining your older house. You could
buy an old house with all the maintenance done by the previous owner - so
maintenance free for the next 15 years.



Where do you get the idea that any house, new or old, can be
maintenance free for 15 years? That's why there are so many crap,
poorly maintained, houses on the market.


They should be, more or less.
Its definitely possible.

  #32   Report Post  
The Natural Philosopher
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

I think its the wrong question to start with.


Houes come in a range of conditions and lifespans irrsepective of when
they are put up.

Ther are some truisms around to illusdtate


(i) Old houses that have stood for 300+ years are probably, lucky, well
maintained, or well built.

(ii) EVERY house needs a minor upgrade every 15 years, and a major one
(up to 30% of the cost of replacement) every 60 years. Its also true to
say that older woners mend and make do to take em up to the 60 year
mark: When they die, its usually time for a massive gutting and
modernisation.

(iii) A brilliant house in a crap location is worth less than a crap
house in a brilliant location.


None of thes issues really answers the OP's question,. becaue its the
wrong question. There are good and bad examples of both.

The question you should be asking is, whether THIS house, at a price I
can get it, represents good value for money to ME, with my (nonexistent?
or not?) DIY skills.



  #33   Report Post  
The Natural Philosopher
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In article ,
"IMM" writes:

Victorian house were speculative and only had a design life of about 50
years too. Every torn away some of the facade of Victorian houses? Bodgers
were there then too.


******** is the term which springs to mind.


A agrre. They had no design life at all. The term wasn';t invented till
much later :-)

Victorian houses were anythung from rapidly erected shelters against the
weather for the mine workers, to huge grandiose works of architecture.

Soem were just thrown togher, others were built with care. Rubble
building was, and sill is a perfectly valid way to make a house if
bricks are very expensive and labor is cheap...

  #34   Report Post  
Bob Eager
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:56:45 UTC, Witchy
wrote:

We're currently in a house built in 1886, and the only thing I don't
like about it is the floors on the top floor all have a little too
much spring for my liking. Oh, and the whole building shakes when
trucks thunder past on the main road and hit the pothole convieniently
outside the front gate.


Sounds very similar to our 1903 house. Only ground and first floor, but
on a main road. Originally detached, but 'terraced' either side in the
1930s.

This one is definitely not a first time buyer's house unless you're
either very practical or have a lot of spare cash - when we bought it
it had dry rot, wet rot, weevil infestation, rising damp (in only 1
room!), no heating, no electric or lights on the top floor and
considerable water damage from an obvious constantly leaky roof
including grass growing above the bathroom ceiling!


Similar things here!

And we still bought it, purely because it had massive amounts of
character and space, and none of the damage was irrepairable over
time.


Exactly.

Finish renovating the dining room when it's not full of old computers.


Living room in our case! Old computers too....

Hope the ceiling doesn't come down!


Living room ceiling did that before Christmas.

Rewire ground floor so
everything isn't surface mounted.


Whole-house rewire nearly finished...!

Of course, not all Victorian houses have suffered this sort of
neglect, but if all of the above doesn't put you off go Victorian.
Apart from anything else this place is now worth 4 times what we paid
for it D My sister's isn't.


Same here. My sister-in-law has a habit of losing money on houses, but
this place too is worth about 4 x what we paid.

--
Bob Eager
rde at tavi.co.uk
PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3,
P70...

  #35   Report Post  
Tony Bryer
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
(iii) A brilliant house in a crap location is worth less
than a crap house in a brilliant location.


Agreed, though the advantage of a crap house in a brilliant
location is that the planners will probably let you knock it
down and build something else. If it's vaguely historical, house
and land may be worth less than the land would be on its own.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm




  #36   Report Post  
IMM
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
I think its the wrong question to start with.


Houes come in a range of conditions and lifespans irrsepective of when
they are put up.

Ther are some truisms around to illusdtate


(i) Old houses that have stood for 300+ years are probably, lucky, well
maintained, or well built.

(ii) EVERY house needs a minor upgrade every 15 years,


A relative has a 20 year old large house. They have just replaced all the
windows to double glazed sealed windows, and most of CH system needs
replacing as some rads are starting to rot. It was installed incorrectly
and was sucking in air for the first 5 years of its life. The boiler is a
very inefficient cast iron job, so a real re-do needed. The gutters also
show signs of wear too. The downstairs toilet was always slow in emptying.
It needs a HepVo in the basin to vent it. The roof tiles have lots of moss
growing on them as well.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 02/01/2004


  #37   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:23:03 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
I think its the wrong question to start with.


Houes come in a range of conditions and lifespans irrsepective of when
they are put up.

Ther are some truisms around to illusdtate


(i) Old houses that have stood for 300+ years are probably, lucky, well
maintained, or well built.

(ii) EVERY house needs a minor upgrade every 15 years,


A relative has a 20 year old large house. They have just replaced all the
windows to double glazed sealed windows,


Then they'll be wondering why there is mould growing on the walls....

and most of CH system needs
replacing as some rads are starting to rot. It was installed incorrectly
and was sucking in air for the first 5 years of its life. The boiler is a
very inefficient cast iron job, so a real re-do needed.


That's incompetent installation and lack of maintenance.

The gutters also
show signs of wear too.


Why?

The downstairs toilet was always slow in emptying.
It needs a HepVo in the basin to vent it.


That's simply bad design and installation. Toilets are hardly rocket
science......

The roof tiles have lots of moss
growing on them as well.


That's no real issue and can easily be removed. I quite like to see
a certain amount of lichens on roof tiles. It makes them look more
interesting.....




---


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #38   Report Post  
S Viemeister
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

Andy Hall wrote:

The roof tiles have lots of moss
growing on them as well.


That's no real issue and can easily be removed. I quite like to see
a certain amount of lichens on roof tiles. It makes them look more
interesting.....

I've been wondering about that - this year, I noticed a few small clumps of
emerald green moss here and there on my roof. Is it likely to do any
damage? If so, what sort of damage? An uncle who saw it, insisted it
needed to be removed immediately, as it would damage the roof.

Sheila

  #40   Report Post  
Dave Plowman
 
Posts: n/a
Default victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?

In article ,
IMM wrote:
The design life of most houses built from the Victorian era through to
the early 1960's (excluding some council prefab constructions) was 200
years.


What? The Victorians only had foundations a foot thick or so. Yes,
they made em to last. Sure they did! Most have been pulled down, with
only the those that by luck, or being slightly better built, surviving.


Which planet do you live on? Vast amounts of London are Victorian, and
virtually the only ones which have been pulled down is if the plot they
occupy could yield better returns by building flats on it. The odd gaps
you see in some streets is usually due to external influence - ie the
Germans...

Or, of course, the odd council that thought people would far prefer living
in tower blocks. Did you used to work for a council?

It would be a strange Victorian house with one foot foundations - most
have cellars to store the coal, etc.

--
*I must always remember that I'm unique, just like everyone else. *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Your thoughts on build standard of 1950s council houses Mike Mitchell UK diy 18 January 14th 21 09:39 PM
water pipes in new houses David UK diy 21 October 27th 03 11:20 AM
New Houses John Smith UK diy 26 October 19th 03 04:16 PM
U values for older houses ? Paul(Retired) UK diy 4 September 10th 03 04:37 PM
those metal plates that cover windows and doors in abandoned houses Muddy Paws UK diy 0 July 3rd 03 03:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"