-
It’s the weird ‘untouched’ premium, isn’t it? You know you’re not buying anyone else’s thinly concealed bodges as they’re all out in the open instead of behind some fresh plaster, and that has a certain peace of mind attached. Plus less to undo to get it how you want it. IMO the bones of the first house are better - features, floor plan, room size. But you would have be to comfortable wielding the money gun to see it through; the ‘done’ house is obviously an easier life if you’re happy with the decisions the previous owners made.
-
Yeah the 900k one. Think it looks pretty good as is...
-
@Howard looks like user-specific pagination strikes again! I was looking at the one on Herongate road.
I'm with you on the issue of pulling on one thread and unraveling a whole jumper. For sure there's a lot that one could do to both. Surveys would shed some light on how much of that is actually necessary.
But I'll stand by the intent of my original post; both houses could be much worse. Or at least, from the photos I've seen worse. I once viewed a flat that was a true wreck. It hadn't been modernised since probably the second world war, or thenabouts... No heating, no bathroom. I think it had been squatted at some point. Massive and in a great location though.
Personally I think paying £1M for a house is unbelievable whatever the condition. But that's London I suppose.
You are reading a single comment by @deleted and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
6pt
hoefla
Cupcakes
@deleted
.