• Login:
Welcome, Register Here
follow PropertyTalk on facebook follow PropertyTalk on twitter Newsletter follow PropertyTalk on LinkedIn follow PropertyTalk on facebook
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21

    Default

    you can take a horse to water but you cant make them drink.

    ​f the house is so unlealthy why are you living init?

  2. #22

    Default

    Because John in Wellington thatís the choice you get, when youíre on a budget! We saw 14 other houses before we viewed this one, and all of them were worse, AND more expensive to live in. I am shocked at the state of New Zealand houses in general, believe me.

    I suggest rather than directing your question at tenants like myself, who have to compromise on rentals in order to save some money to try and get on the increasingly out of reach property ladder, direct it to the decision makers who allowed houses such as these to be built, and lived in. I havenít seen one old house - healthy or not - in Wellington that wouldíve even come close to being allowed to be built in the U.K. and seeing as the vast majority of houses in wellington are of this low quality, uninsulated, poorly heated design, then if you do the maths youíll work out that the majority of us do not have a choice, financially, to rent a healthy house.
    Last edited by em720; 19-09-2018 at 02:54 PM.

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FJW View Post
    Hi Em 270,

    Why don't you get a couple more prices then compare them and then you'll know whether its reasonable or not.

    Most situations involving water and leaks transpire into additional costs once the cavity is opened up, very rarely there won't be any additional work once exposed.

    You've pretty much covered most avenues with doing what you've already done....
    Hi FJW, thanks for your reply. I think if we were going to put in an offer we would definitely get some additional quotes for the work. Like you said though, additional costs would be very common, and that can be hard to factor in to quotes, which is understandable, but it just means the level of risk for us it too high in this case.

  4. #24

    Default

    you miss the point
    thius is an insulated reasonably well built house with proper foundations and the like relatively new electrical etc

    my point was that you have lived in for a year and yet worry about the healthy envirnment??

    leaky houses are a concern but the stigma with monolithics has been largely driven by legal claims and exageration to justify big payoiuts that councils are quck to supoport

    buy at the right price and do nothing but maintain the present cpondition eventually land value will allow you to rebuild. Someone will buy this at land value plus 10%. It might as well be you?

    but your problem is getting finance on a home without a CCC? is that right?

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John the builder View Post
    you miss the point
    thius is an insulated reasonably well built house with proper foundations and the like relatively new electrical etc

    my point was that you have lived in for a year and yet worry about the healthy envirnment??

    leaky houses are a concern but the stigma with monolithics has been largely driven by legal claims and exageration to justify big payoiuts that councils are quck to supoport

    buy at the right price and do nothing but maintain the present cpondition eventually land value will allow you to rebuild. Someone will buy this at land value plus 10%. It might as well be you?

    but your problem is getting finance on a home without a CCC? is that right?
    Firstly, I don't think its very well built. Even as a non-builder, the length of the eaves round the house are an obvious design fault, even to my untrained eye. Yes it may have proper foundations, and the electrics are fine, agreed. but the whole shell of the house is cladding that is not designed to be weather tight. I think that renders the house as badly built, even if the foundations and electrics are fine, in my opinion. The building report has also pointed out a number of other design faults with the house, that I would never have known about, but now do. So in total, for a 20 year old house, I think its a poorly built property. But that aside, yes, if we could get it for only 10% above the land value, and sit in it for years until its worth demolishing and rebuilding new, then great. But rebuilding a house that will add value to the land it sits on will be a huge expense, and who knows how much more expensive it will be to build in maybe 5 years time? It already seems extortionate to me - a good 25-30% more expensive than building in the UK? I understand why, but it doesn't make it a very appealing option for a first home buyer having to build a fairly large house.

    You say "buy at the right price", and yes I totally agree. But at the minute, its going for more like 25% above the land value (which is why in my original post I was asking a bit about what someone should pay for such a property, as I had no idea if that was a good deal or not). Also, I have been told that the positioning of the house would make it difficult and expensive to get large machinery up to, which would escalate the cost of building a new house further. If it was a viable option for us, we would do it, but I think its a overpriced at the minute, and the cost of demolishing, and rebuilding a house of that size would just not work with our budget. That's definitely the way to do it though! Having read people's responses on here though, and mulled it over, its a task that is far too big for us, and to pay a mortage on a new build, AND rent to live somewhere else whilst its being built, would not be possible for us, particularly given the high chance of construction costs to increase because of one problem or another.

    I am also not especially worried about my health in terms of the leakiness / mould of the house. I referred to my health in a previous post more in the sense of the stress that would no doubt be caused by taking on a huge project like this. Currently, living in it as a tenant is no stress at all - its cheap, and liveable, and enabling us to save for a house that hopefully won't send our stress through the roof. But being an owner of this property, with the looming bill of rebuilding it from scratch in the future, would change that fairly rapidly, in my opinion.

    The finance on the non-CCC aspect isn't an issue in this situation.
    Last edited by em720; 19-09-2018 at 04:03 PM.

  6. #26

    Default

    if you dont want risk of ownership then continue to rent

    if you like the area and this gets you into it and the mortgage is less than the rent? then buy at the right price and sell in 10 years at land plus 10% then.

    It really is a no brainer as long as the numbers are right and the area a good investment.


    there are innovative approaches being tested now that could lower the reclad cost even further.

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John the builder View Post
    if you dont want risk of ownership then continue to rent

    if you like the area and this gets you into it and the mortgage is less than the rent? then buy at the right price and sell in 10 years at land plus 10% then.

    It really is a no brainer as long as the numbers are right and the area a good investment.


    there are innovative approaches being tested now that could lower the reclad cost even further.
    There is low risk of ownership if you buy a properly built house. I can't wait to get onto the property ladder, and not rent anymore. I'm not scared of buying a house, and I'm not especially scared of buying a house that isn't going to stand the test of time. I'm scared of buying a house that is overpriced AND isn't going to stand the test of time. At this point, this is exactly what this house is.

    Maybe I'm not being brave enough, but I don't have the extra leeway financially to be brave enough to do what you're suggesting. Someone who has the extra financial buffer for such a project, will likely be braver than me, and then it would be a no brainer to buy, demolish and rebuild, as you're suggesting. And anyway, from your percentage above, the numbers are not right - it is overpriced. Haven't had any offers yet, and that must be why.

    ETA- I'm very glad there are innovative approaches being tested now to lower reclad costs - the quote we were given for removing what is effectly a 2 cm thick board from around the house, seemed extortionate. - $20,000 just to pull the stuff off! That was just one quote, however. I don't know if perhaps this is actually reasonable or not, but it doesn't sound it to me.
    Last edited by em720; 19-09-2018 at 04:32 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lower Hutt
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Yeah unfortunately water and buildings don't go hand in hand

    It depends on how much you want the property.

    A moisture test would be a good gauge though, what' the results come back at?
    Fraser Wilkinson
    www.managemyrental.co.nz
    Wellington / Lower Hutt / Upper Hutt / Porirua

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FJW View Post
    Yeah unfortunately water and buildings don't go hand in hand

    It depends on how much you want the property.

    A moisture test would be a good gauge though, what' the results come back at?
    All within normal range, FJW. But they did not moisture test the two ends of the house which have been specified as being ''high risk for moisture ingress''.

    I think the only option with this house would be to buy it (but not for its current price, which I think is too high) and then demolish further down the line and rebuild. The cost of rebuild for such a site would be too much for us I think.

  10. #30

    Default

    Was this the property that went to auction afew weeks back in Khandallah?


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. No code of compliance on rental home
    By benedwar in forum Tenant Stuff (NZ)
    Replies: 138
    Last Post: 19-01-2018, 01:32 PM
  2. No code of compliance certificate on apartment
    By doulu in forum Finance, legal and tax (NZ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-09-2017, 10:59 AM
  3. No Code of Compliance
    By Kay in forum Finance, legal and tax (NZ)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 22-02-2016, 04:16 PM
  4. Code of compliance still not issued
    By Rayandstew in forum Finance, legal and tax (NZ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 27-08-2014, 11:04 AM
  5. insuring a property without code of compliance
    By phillip30 in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 14-04-2014, 02:28 PM
  6. Garage and No Code of Compliance
    By K-Rad in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-07-2013, 07:58 PM
  7. Code of Compliance Certificate - WTF
    By buxlo122 in forum Finance, legal and tax (NZ)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-03-2012, 10:07 PM
  8. Code compliance achieved
    By Glenn in forum Commercial Property (NZ)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 29-04-2011, 10:29 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •