You are reading a single comment by @Prole. and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
but largely it seemed to be based on square footage
Well that's essentially what you're buying isn't it?
When you're looking at £hundreds per square foot compared with a lick of paint it all stacks up even compared to that new kitchen or whatever. That's why developers are only interested in square footage at the end of the day, finishes are cheap in comparison.
Prole.-
Of course, hence why I didn't replace the kitchen or bathroom in our old place. The only thing the improvements do is increase the appeal to buyers not make you property more valuable.
The first surveyor on the downvalued property stopped us making an expensive mistake and made me research much more before our next offer!
mustardbeak
Having sold and bought recently, I would be weary of an estate agent valuation based on 'how nice' your property is. We were hit with a down valuation on a property we wanted to buy of 75k (it was actually 90k off the original estate agent valuation) as no matter how nice it was the price was not justifiable with comparables in the area.
On our sale, our kitchen needed doing, windows could have done with replacing, carpets 8 years old, bathroom needed doing etc we had to get it valued by a surveyor (as it was shared ownership) and got it valued for about 30k more than we expected despite all of the above, but largely it seemed to be based on square footage and the ability to show reasonable comparables in the area.
The property we eventually bought was a brand new show flat with all the furniture, appliances, soft furnishings etc and none of that was taken into account in the valuation.
In my recent experience certain estate agents are massively over inflating valuations and hoping they can find a buyer with the cash to overpay to make up the shortfall.