|
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. |
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 |
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 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
In article ,
says... 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. People I know are moving in to a brand new build (large house builder), and it's bloody awful. They've got an attached garage with a stud partition wall between that and the living area! The finish is shockingly poor. One of the "bedrooms" is 6x6 feet. They do have double-glazing, though. We've got sliding sash windows that rattle a bit. Our 1902 house, on the other hand, has bricks between all downstairs rooms, and even one upstairs. I suppose it depends if you want to put a shelf on the wall. -- Hywel I do not eat quiche http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/ http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php |
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 |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
"Hywel Jenkins" wrote in message t... In article , says... 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. People I know are moving in to a brand new build (large house builder), and it's bloody awful. They've got an attached garage with a stud partition wall between that and the living area! The finish is shockingly poor. One of the "bedrooms" is 6x6 feet. They do have double-glazing, though. We've got sliding sash windows that rattle a bit. Sounds like a worst case example. I can show you 5 bed new houses that are very solid and well made. --- -- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
|
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 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
In article ,
says... "Hywel Jenkins" wrote in message t... In article , says... 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. People I know are moving in to a brand new build (large house builder), and it's bloody awful. They've got an attached garage with a stud partition wall between that and the living area! The finish is shockingly poor. One of the "bedrooms" is 6x6 feet. They do have double-glazing, though. We've got sliding sash windows that rattle a bit. Sounds like a worst case example. I can show you 5 bed new houses that are very solid and well made. I'm sure there are many like that, though I've never seen any. -- Hywel I do not eat quiche http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/ http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
"Hywel Jenkins" wrote in message t... In article , says... "Hywel Jenkins" wrote in message t... In article , says... 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. People I know are moving in to a brand new build (large house builder), and it's bloody awful. They've got an attached garage with a stud partition wall between that and the living area! The finish is shockingly poor. One of the "bedrooms" is 6x6 feet. They do have double-glazing, though. We've got sliding sash windows that rattle a bit. Sounds like a worst case example. I can show you 5 bed new houses that are very solid and well made. I'm sure there are many like that, though I've never seen any. You don't have to look too hard to see them. --- -- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 02/01/2004 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
Richard wrote in message . ..
(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. A few notes: Some Victorian houses are prone to structural problems. The ones remaining today are basically the ones that didnt fall down or get demolished. Many have gone. If buying this old I would want to know what the structure is about. Some are good, with acceptable foundations and brickwork repointed and in one piece. OTOH some are not. I've seen houses with foundations 3 bricks deep, with 4" walls holding up 2 stories, structural cracks, top row wall bricks that you could literally just pick up with your hand, or walls bulging all over the place. If you buy old, know what youre buying. With new builds of course there are some rejects as well there. There are some houses with a litany of dreadful bodges: either avoid them or pay way less and fix it all. Finally, surveys - ruddy useless. Better to learn the basics of the subject. Well, now you know what to look out for. There was a thread several months ago on what to look for when buying, very thorough too. Regards, NT |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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' |
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 |
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 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
|
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 |
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 |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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... |
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 :oD 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... |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
victorian/edwardian houses or new houses?
In article ,
says... People I know are moving in to a brand new build (large house builder), and it's bloody awful. They've got an attached garage with a stud partition wall between that and the living area! The finish is shockingly poor. One of the "bedrooms" is 6x6 feet. They do have double-glazing, though. We've got sliding sash windows that rattle a bit. Sounds like a worst case example. I can show you 5 bed new houses that are very solid and well made. I'm sure there are many like that, though I've never seen any. You don't have to look too hard to see them. No doubt that's the case and I didn't mean to sound as though I'm some sort of authority on them. -- Hywel I do not eat quiche http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/ http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php |
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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:45 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter