Category Archives: houses
Went to a house auction today. Only a very small local affair held at the Bedford Hotel, but nevertheless an interesting experience. One of the lots has been on my radar for a while, and I’d’ve been interested in bidding if I had a regular income stream to support a 50%-or-so mortgage on it.
Since I’m not in a position to bid on the interesting house, I was definitely not bidding. I took a seat in the back row, leaving most people where I could observe them, but standing behind were not just event staff, but also some punters. The room was stuffy but otherwise pleasant. The auctioneer was not using a sound system, and I had to listen up to hear him, but his patter was amusing, engaging and reassuring. As indeed it jolly well should be from someone in his line of work!
Lot 1: a tiny one-bedroom cottage in a lovely (but impractical for someone needing connectivity) – location, in need of extensive renovation. Guide price £65-75k, went for £83k in a fairly lively contest.
Lot 2: a much bigger but ugly house in a nondescript location. Guide price reduced from £175k in my catalogue to range £150-175k. Bidding again competitive but looked reluctant: the buyer, an elderly gentleman, looked as if he was letting the auctioneer bully him into his £165k winning bid. I couldn’t even be sure the previous £164k wasn’t “off the wall” – a thought that crossed my mind again at Lot 6.
Lot 3: a nice but not economically useful plot of land. Two thirds of an acre, so one would’ve thought very little value without planning permission – which it didn’t have. And within the National Park. Plus a clawback if buyer sells at a profit within five years. Guide price £40-50k seemed horrendous, but it fetched £45k. Evidently someone has high expectations of getting planning permission!
Lot 4: a pretty decent-looking investment property: a big sea-front house divided into three decent-sized flats. Guide price £160-180k, reduced from 180-190 in the brochure. Not much interest, and it went at £160k to someone bidding by ‘phone. Looked like a bargain to me!
Lot 5: the one I was interested in. A three-bedroom riverside house, formerly a forge building. Been a long time on the market but overpriced: in the autumn of 2009 I was thinking “if it comes down within offering distance of £175k before the end of the year (and £175k stamp-duty holiday), I’ll definitely take a look“. Guide price £180-200k, so finally in the ballpark of my target and looking like a bargain if I’d still been on a mortgageable income. The auctioneer clearly also considered it the star attraction, and said so. But he and I were both wrong: there were few bidders, and the £175k best bid failed to secure the house. Evidently a would-be vendor still deluded after over two years failing to sell. Land registry shows it last sold at £238k in November 2003 so the owner is taking a hit, but given that they don’t actually live there it’s hard to have any sympathy for a speculator losing out.
Finally Lot 6: a former chapel converted to a home. Looked interesting, and at a £80-100k guide price I might have contemplated bidding if I’d been happy with the location (Okehampton). Bidding went up to £104k, and the auctioneer tried very hard to cajole the £103k-bidder at the front into raising to £105k. But unlike Lot 2, this one wasn’t budging, and it ended without selling. Could the £104k have been “off the wall” on the assumption of £105k, or was this a less-than-honest would-be vendor so blatantly mismatched guide and reserve prices?
All in all, an interesting experience, and I think I could feel more confident now to bid at a future auction. Though of course that’s subject to caveats about whether I’d hold my calm under the stress of competitive bidding.
 there’s no ‘phone signal, no clarity over ADSL, and in a steep valley where even satellite might fall short.
What are the criteria for consulting local people over planning applications?
When there were major works to build a new apartment block (9 apartments) just across the road, we were not even notified, let alone consulted. On other occasions they’ve gone through the motions but avoided the risk of getting real feedback from the public. On other occasions, they’ve just pinned up a little notice.
Today I got a real, physical letter from the council. I’m being consulted, and there’s nothing in there that smells of evasion!
So what is the subject of this consultation? It’s an application from next-door-but-one to install a dormer window. About as trivial a change as anyone could ask for! Perhaps it’s just the major works they avoid asking us about?
Anyway, if the neighbours want a dormer window, that’s fine by me. I might put in a polite request that their builders not inflict a ghetto-blaster on the neighbourhood, but I think that’s better done by a friendly word with the neighbour than through a bureaucratic planning process.
I had an idea the current government was talking about relaxing some of the red tape on planning. I hope this kind of nonsense is what they mean!
I’ve just viewed another two houses. Between them, they seem to sum up a whole lot of what’s wrong in mid-market UK property.
House 1: 1930s (I think) 3 bed semi. Has potential to be a nice house: decent amount of space, small front garden and larger, very nice back garden, big round bay window in sitting room and front bedroom. Clearly hadn’t been decorated for some time, with walls quite marked, but the carpets (and glossed-up wood in the sitting room) were in good nick. But horribly let down by the kitchen and, to a lesser extent, bathroom. The kitchen was a showstopper: far too small, greasy, smelly, and with a floorboard quite rotted away in the recess where a washing machine should stand. OK if I were buying and could replace the whole thing, but not to rent.
House 2: modern. A development called Heritage Park, built around an old foundry which is a beautiful building. But the greed of the developer glares through this house, which is not part of the old building. In the pursuit of profits it’s been positioned just a patio’s width from a high wall, and the back rooms on all three floors were very dark (on a bright sunny and amazingly warm day). No outdoor space in front (just the dark patio behind), and the indoor space is cramped, without even the hallway space for a bike. Note to developers – if you want to build at that kind of density, build flats not oppressively-cramped houses! The kitchen and two bathrooms are nice – all that was missing in the other place – but they don’t make up the defects, nor the cheap and tacky feel common to most UK houses built since 1945, or the clouds of flies that emerged when I opened a window.
There are houses that look altogether better than either of those. They just have a nasty tendency to be in places where broadband connectivity is at best uncertain. Ho hum.
Been house-hunting again today.
Specifically, I went to view an apartment, which is in fact more a wing of a grand old house. Set down a private drive, on the steep slope down one of our many estuaries, with fantastic views from the grounds and from parts of the house – most importantly the spacious and elegant sitting room. The house itself includes extravagant luxuries such as classical columns, and much of it is covered in ivy. A spacious three-bedroom, two-bathroom place (the long bedroom would become my office) in a quiet and beautiful location within comfortable cycling distance of Plymouth: what more could I ask?
Well, there are drawbacks. Much of it could use redecoration, and the agent tells me the landlord is very particular about how it gets done. Running costs are going to be very high, with lots of large, single-glazed sash windows (five in the sitting room alone, and excluding the french-style doors on the dining area which is open-plan to it), and no gas supply at all. But encouragingly, they are in decent condition, and every one I tried opens and closes cleanly and easily.
The agent’s particulars are unclear on the subject of furniture: in one place it says part-furnished, elsewhere it says unfurnished. Today it looked not very far off fully-furnished, and the agent said they’d prefer a tenant who’ll accept the furniture. While some of the furniture is nice and I’d be happy to keep it, other items fall a long way short of the quality of the flat itself. Most importantly, I’d need to get rid of the main bed as seen, though the two singles in my prospective office could stay (in the smaller room) as spare beds.
Most unusual here seems to be the relationship of the landlord, agent and prospective tenants. Apparently the agent will present a report and recommendation, whereupon I – having expressed my interest – may or may not be invited back for a second visit and to meet the landlord. Not at all like the usual scenario, where they’ll just take any tenant who’ll pay and who ticks the right boxes!
Overall, it’s the nicest place I’ve seen for some time, and I think I’ll take it if offered. Unless, like buses, good properties come in batches, and I take somewhere else first!