View Single Post
  #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/