Used home vs New home

arelyn

We are considering to buy a house in few months time outside the Dublin metropolis but yet the prices of new homes are still too high for us. We will love to buy a new house but we are not totally ruling out a second hand (used) house.
What are the unexpected pitfalls in buying a used house

Looly8726

arelyn wrote: »

We are considering to buy a house in few months time outside the Dublin metropolis but yet the prices of new homes are still too high for us. We will love to buy a new house but we are not totally ruling out a second hand (used) house.
What are the unexpected pitfalls in buying a used house

I would say the main pitfall may be that used houses will need some work to modernize them generally and sometimes the layouts aren’t as attractive as new houses. Maybe the lower BER but that wouldn’t bother me too much.
I can’t think of any other to be honest. Unless you’re thinking of buying a really old house, that would be a different kettle of fish.
Buying a used house, you get a nicer price, you have the opportunity to make it your own over time, you’re moving into an established community, they usually have better parking and gardens too.

the_syco

arelyn wrote: »

What are the unexpected pitfalls in buying a used house

That you may not like the reason that they're selling; but you may only find out what it is a few weeks after buying the house (such as the neighbours).

Mrs OBumble

the_syco wrote: »

That you may not like the reason that they're selling; but you may only find out what it is a few weeks after buying the house (such as the neighbours).

There's as much risk of dodgy neighbours in new houses as existing ones, though. Maybe even more, given that new estates now must have X% social housing.

Dolbhad

Looly8726 wrote: »

I would say the main pitfall may be that used houses will need some work to modernize them generally and sometimes the layouts aren’t as attractive as new houses. Maybe the lower BER but that wouldn’t bother me too much.
I can’t think of any other to be honest. Unless you’re thinking of buying a really old house, that would be a different kettle of fish.
Buying a used house, you get a nicer price, you have the opportunity to make it your own over time, you’re moving into an established community, they usually have better parking and gardens too.

I agree but make sure you get a good engineer or surveyor to do the survey of house. Get recommendations. Maybe have a plumber or electrician out to look if engineer says you should. Get drains testing carried out if it’s older house. It’s buyer beware so just make sure of work had to be done you know what it will cost. Call to the area at different times and see what it’s like. Chat to neighbours and see what they say. Also call into local guard station if your unfamiliar with area and see if they can give you any insight to an area.

Ray Palmer

I have noticed a recent trend near me where new builds are a lot more expensive than older houses in the area. Talking about 30%+ more. Yes the new houses have better layout and BER ratings but you could easily buy one of the older houses and spend 20% on the property to get the same to your exact desires.
One of the weirdest ones is houses being built across from the Artane Boys Band practice hall. Not only do you have to deal with the noise from the school but the band practice daily and March in their carpark during the summer. For 675k I would want some peace and quite

Wesser

' used' houses tend to be inbetter locations ie more central.... as the city spreads outwards....although obviously this os a massive generalisation..... and also.... except for a blip durung the celtic tiger... tend to be built of a better quality ie 1920s to 1980s... also have more character.....i personally would not desire a new house .... it seems to be an american thing to want a new house

vintagecosmos

Keep in mind with new the cost of getting it to the standard you want I e. Carpets, curtains, blinds, alarm system, landscaping, painting etc.

Dolbhad

Wesser wrote: »

' used' houses tend to be inbetter locations ie more central.... as the city spreads outwards....although obviously this os a massive generalisation..... and also.... except for a blip durung the celtic tiger... tend to be built of a better quality ie 1920s to 1980s... also have more character.....i personally would not desire a new house .... it seems to be an american thing to want a new house

Yes I wouldn’t touch anything built in the boom. I’d stop at 2001.

Abba987

Dolbhad wrote: »

Yes I wouldn’t touch anything built in the boom. I’d stop at 2001.

Give me a second hand house any day.

fjon

Dolbhad wrote: »

Yes I wouldn’t touch anything built in the boom. I’d stop at 2001.

I'm no expert, but I'd imagine the standards went up a bit post 2009 or so?

c.p.w.g.w

fjon wrote: »

I'm no expert, but I'd imagine the standards went up a bit post 2009 or so?

Thing with older houses, if there is a problem they are normally apparent after 20 years at least.

I know of many houses built during the boom and after that are currently unsellable due to numerous reasons. A couple of estates I know are full of homes sinking... literally

Qrt

fjon wrote: »

I'm no expert, but I'd imagine the standards went up a bit post 2009 or so?

My house (well, the ma’s) was built in 2005/2006 and it’s actually really well built. It surprises me all the time.

dubrov

New houses in new estates generally have:

Positives:
Air to water Heat Pumps / Solar Panels
Better Air Quality due to MHRV
Better insulation
Under floor heating
Better layout
No need to replace appliances/electrics/plumbing and all the other finishes.
More of a family feel as most people will move in around the same age

Negatives
Small gardens
Less public green space
Management Fees
Generally worse proximity to schools/amenities
Too many cars for too few spaces
Cost

omerin

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

There's as much risk of dodgy neighbours in new houses as existing ones, though. Maybe even more, given that new estates now must have X% social housing.

What a vile, ignorant generalisation.

beauf

Dolbhad wrote: »

Yes I wouldn’t touch anything built in the boom. I’d stop at 2001.

It really depends if the builder was decent or not.

Mad_maxx

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

There's as much risk of dodgy neighbours in new houses as existing ones, though. Maybe even more, given that new estates now must have X% social housing.

Absolutely, I'd buy a used house in an established estate quicker

Mad_maxx

omerin wrote: »

What a vile, ignorant generalisation.

No, a reality based one

BarryD2

Dolbhad wrote: »

I agree but make sure you get a good engineer or surveyor to do the survey of house.

Pah! We got a survey of our second hand house prior to purchase and to be honest, it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. Said nothing that wasn't plain to be seen and carried caveats about parts of the structure that were covered up etc.

s7ryf3925pivug

We got a homebuyers report.

Some of the things it missed, that we discovered in last few months:

Non-compliant gas tank and piping. Leaking tank, pipes and flue.
Gaps between ridges and tiles of the garage. Leaking.
Extensive mould on a cold bridge behind a fitted wardrobe in main bedroom.
Septic system pump failed.
Missing gap at gables in attic insulation, creating ventilation issues.
Non compliant wood fireplace around stove, which is a fire hazard.

One thing he did spot was that the doors mainly didnt close tightly. He recommended these were rehung.... All I needed to do was to move the metal bit on the frame a bit on all of them. Which took a couple of hours and the only material expense was an ice lolly stick which I used as a shim in one place.

You can have issues with new homes too though.

Personally I would choose a house that was built in the last decade because it will be better insulated and more airtight, which would make it heat pump ready. This might be important as we move away from fossil fuels... Our 1970s bungalow would be very expensive to modernise enough for such a system.

dubrov

Averie Millions Leadership wrote: »

We got a homebuyers report.

Personally I would choose a house that was built in the last decade because it will be better insulated and more airtight, which would make it heat pump ready.

There is no doubt that a new house is the winner but would you pay a 30% premium for the privilege?

4ensic15

the three most important factors in a house are:-
1. Location
2. Location.
3. Location.

Once you get those right, whther the house is oldor new is secondary.

s7ryf3925pivug

dubrov wrote: »

There is no doubt that a new house is the winner but would you pay a 30% premium for the privilege?

For sure. It would be preferable from a financial perspective, as well as a practical/hassle one in our case. It would cost more than 30% to modernise as much as we'd like. The issues I outlined have been a huge hassle to sort out and expensive too.

Also the place has only started to feel like it's ours recently. The quirks, junk and dirt from the previous owners all contributed to a sense of it still being their space. This place came with a lot more junk, dirt and quirks than most, but I think it would be a factor with any older dwelling to some extent.

The one good thing with it being an old house is that it has a mature, very nice garden.

Dolbhad

Averie Millions Leadership wrote: »

For sure. It would be preferable from a financial perspective, as well as a practical/hassle one in our case. It would cost more than 30% to modernise as much as we'd like. The issues I outlined have been a huge hassle to sort out and expensive too.

Also the place has only started to feel like it's ours recently. The quirks, junk and dirt from the previous owners all contributed to a sense of it still being their space. This place came with a lot more junk, dirt and quirks than most, but I think it would be a factor to some extent.

The one good thing with it being an old house is that it has a mature, very nice garden.

Do you wish you had bought a new build though?

s7ryf3925pivug

Dolbhad wrote: »

Do you wish you had bought a new build though?

I think post 2009 houses would be fine also as building regulations kicked in again after seeing some of the carry on from boom years but I don’t seen many of those for sale as the people in them aren’t there that long to move on.

Yes most surveys are “visual” inspection but I do think paying extra for drains testing, electrician etc
Is worth it. But suppose houses do have life spans themselves before you have to reinvest with them and do inherit other peoples problems. Just new build estates look horrible to me. It’s all grey and concrete with no personality as every house looks exactly the same. And I’m too impossible to wait years for a mature feel.

A house since 2009 would be fine. I would have preferred that but we took the best option in the area, at a good price, and nothing better has come on the market since. The garden is lovely. We don't live in an estate.

Thorough inspections would definitely be worth it. In our case even with the issues it was still the best option in the location we wanted.

What a lot of people do around here is to buy a house like ours, demolish it and build a large new house. Retrospectively I can definitely see the appeal to that, though it would be an awful lot of hassle, and paying rent and a mortgage concurrently for an indefinite period would not be ideal.

Mrs OBumble

omerin wrote: »

What a vile, ignorant generalisation.

My observation is that

• 80% of people in social housing are fine citizens who I'd be happy to live next to.
• 95% of people who pay for their own houses are people I've be happy to live next to (they may not be fine citizens, but at least they keep up the pretence)

Do the math: Which scenario gives a higher probability of getting a troublesome neighbour in the estate?

Ray Palmer

4ensic15 wrote: »

the three most important factors in a house are:-
1. Location
2. Location.
3. Location.

Once you get those right, whther the house is oldor new is secondary.

As I pointed out new houses near me are selling for a lot more than the older houses. So it isn't all about location apparently, to the extent a new house in a bad location within the area close by is selling for 40% more. So some people think a new build has a huge benefit over an older one.

Ush1

Ray Palmer wrote: »

As I pointed out new houses near me are selling for a lot more than the older houses. So it isn't all about location apparently, to the extent a new house in a bad location within the area close by is selling for 40% more. So some people think a new build has a huge benefit over an older one.

Probably a premium due to the HTB scheme.

markpb

Ray Palmer wrote: »

As I pointed out new houses near me are selling for a lot more than the older houses.

New houses tend to be significantly bigger than older houses. A standard 3 bed built in an estate in the last five years will probably be around 1,500 sq ft. The same house built in an estate in the 80s and 90s will be about 900 sq ft. The gardens are typically the reverse.

beauf

markpb wrote: »

New houses tend to be significantly bigger than older houses. A standard 3 bed built in an estate in the last five years will probably be around 1,500 sq ft. The same house built in an estate in the 80s and 90s will be about 900 sq ft. The gardens are typically the reverse.

Also as someone said the layout is generally better, with open plan living wider doors etc, wider bathroom, due to accessibility legislation. Which is why people tend to restructure an old house to modernise the layout. Bedrooms can be smaller in 80~90s houses also. Houses older than that tend to be bigger.

Which makes you think about the current ideas of building tiny apartments and communal living to ease the crisis.

Ray Palmer

markpb wrote: »

Ray Palmer wrote: »

As I pointed out new houses near me are selling for a lot more than the older houses.

New houses tend to be significantly bigger than older houses. A standard 3 bed built in an estate in the last five years will probably be around 1,500 sq ft. The same house built in an estate in the 80s and 90s will be about 900 sq ft. The gardens are typically the reverse.

They aren't that much bigger or superior to justify the prices in my opinion. Obviously some think it is worth it. Changing the old houses to be open plan isn't that expensive. Upgrading the insulation isn't either. Could easily buy an older house and bring it to the same spec for a lot less than the premium of a new build.
The point remains some people are willing to pay more for a new build and location certainly isn't the only criteria.

beauf

Anyone I know who has done and extension or rebuild an older house has done,

Converted the Attic,
Extended out the Kitchen/dining rooms to a open plan design.
Replaced the plumbing.
Replaced the electrics
Replaced the insulation
Replaced the heating system.
New Windows and Doors.
Built an outside patio area ( slabbed, and no one is using timbder decking)
Optionally crearted and office, and rewired for ethernet and wall mounted TVs
Optionaly got rid of the fireplace.
I haven't seen any refurbs use solar. Only new builds seem to have solar.
new furniture.

I would say most are spending 50~100k. But you have to be careful as the money you put in is almost never going to come back in a sale.
As the house is only worth so much.

The Mulk

A lot of the new houses around my way are advertised bigger due to a 3rd floor/attic conversion.
Smaller footprint overall.
Our first house was new off plans, a nice house/area but a lot smaller than the older houses in the area.
Issues with a new estate included, delay in roads being finished, delay in area being taken over by local council, which in turn meant have to organise and collect money for upkeep. Apartments being built on an area that was advertised as a green space.
We moved to a more mature estate in the area, houses are a lot bigger, estate is managed and maintained by council funds. Area is quieter and nearer to village for pubs etc. The house needed modernisation, but is modern now and well energy rated and cost a lot less than smaller new houses in the estate next door.
If your young and working full time, a new house makes sense as your spare time is your own, you're not spending weekends working on an old house.

JustMe,K

arelyn wrote: »

We are considering to buy a house in few months time outside the Dublin metropolis but yet the prices of new homes are still too high for us. We will love to buy a new house but we are not totally ruling out a second hand (used) house.
What are the unexpected pitfalls in buying a used house

IMV, you never know what you are getting with an older house and a survey will never pick up everything that should concern you, no matter how good it is. Bear in mind that when you bring tradesmen in to work on an older house, they need to do it to current regs, so you might find that an apparently simple job becomes bigger. To counter that though, an older house is likely to be in a more settled area, probably with a slightly older population. And when you are doing work you dont feel bad about ripping up carpets that are years old, where you might not be so inclined to take up flooring thats decent and new just because you dont like it! Similar with kitchens and bathrooms etc. Gardens in older houses tend to be bigger than newer houses.
Depends on whats important to you - some people like the shiny new house that they need to do little or nothing to, some people like the older house that they really can put their own stamp on.
I'd rather be in an older house that doesn't have tonnes of kids running round the place, than a new housing estate with young kids in every house (and as a result running round the place), but if I had young kids, I would prefer to be in a younger area where they can make friends close by, which can become more important as they get older depending on how you feel about being an unpaid and unappreciated chauffeur!

theteal

In our own experience (viewed about 40 houses in East London/Essex about 2 years ago), we found that new builds were smaller, more expensive and in a few cases I could hear people viewing adjoining houses which didn't bode well for sound. I'm not a fan of this recent open-plan lark, I don't want to hear the kettle boiling every 20 minutes as I'm trying to watch something so a separate living room and kitchen was a must.

Now while I think we got quite lucky in the end, got good deal on a late 70's semi which was very well cared for (quite a well off family lived in it for 27 years, kids off to uni, parents moved out to the coast) it's not without it's niggles. As the owners were a generation or two older than us, there are going to be style differences e.g. mahogany fireplace and stairs, cream carpets downstairs (which we had ruined inside a week, gotta love a toddler and tomato based foods!) etc. so there were a list of costs straight away - engineered oak floor for all of downstairs (except kitchen) was £3000 iirc, we've a quote for oak banisters and internal doors which is going to be £3500, carpeting stairs, landing and bedrooms is £1700, bi-fold door at dining room will be probably another £1000 - £1500. All I can say is thank fook they changed the stamp duty rates the week we signed the contract!

We're in just over year and not all of this is done, there's no panic as it's very comfortable as is. Also the house is as solid as they come, I wouldn't know the adjoining neighbours were there if it weren't for our cats sitting on the garage roof looking curiously over at the little tortoise that rampages around their garden. Our gardens are awesome by the way, 2 apple trees, grape vines, raspberries, blackcurrents, cherries, rhubarb and both a garage and shed connected to the electric supply. Oh and outside hot tap for the kids paddling pool, as you do!

Then we have the new 4 bed semi's maybe 3km outside of town (we're about 500m) are £150k+ on top of what we paid, they are lovely but that is just madness for a BER rating and a newer kitchen. There's nothing (i.e. shops, amenities) out there, just quick access to the dual carriageway - which they can probably hear.

So I'm very much in the used home camp. It probably doesn't help that I have an ingrained distrust for builders/developers and anything built in the last 20 years but that's possibly very common for Irish people of my age (mid 30s).

Ray Palmer

beauf wrote: »

I would say most are spending 50~100k. But you have to be careful as the money you put in is almost never going to come back in a sale.
As the house is only worth so much.

I agree that all sounds about right. The thing I am pointing out is the houses are €250k-€300k difference in price for new houses. While some mentioned attics having rooms some of these rooms aren't deemed habitable due to building regs. So they are trying to suggest these are extra bedrooms but not stating it.
This seems to be new as there were new builds in the areas but not a huge price difference.

PhoenixParker

theteal wrote: »

In our own experience (viewed about 40 houses in East London/Essex about 2 years ago), we found that new builds were smaller, more expensive and in a few cases I could hear people viewing adjoining houses which didn't bode well for sound. I'm not a fan of this recent open-plan lark, I don't want to hear the kettle boiling every 20 minutes as I'm trying to watch something so a separate living room and kitchen was a must.

Situation in Ireland is a bit different due to the boom/bust cycle and the timing of changes to building regs.

70s/80s houses here tend to be a decent size but unless they’ve been modernized they’ll typically have one bathroom, maybe a tiny toilet crammed under the stairs. Sound insulation is usually ok but they tend to be cold and expensive to heat.

From the mid 90s to the late 2000s the economy picked up, house sizes shrank and building standards were low. 900sqft 3 beds, 1100sqft 4 beds, 600sqft 2 bed apartments. Sound insulation was hit and miss but typically miss. Heat insulation was the same. While it was a short time period, huge numbers of houses were built so this accounts for a lot of houses.

The economy tanked and there was also a major update in building regs with respect to heat insulation and minimum dwelling sizes, plus things like having decent sized ground floor bathrooms, storage space. Overall there’s been a step change in house quality.

For the OP, it’s honestly not about new build vs old, it’s about the whole package and your priorities. I always say think carefully about your priorities.

Walking/public transport/cycling/driving
Willingness to commute
Likelihood to change jobs (and to where)
House features you like
Love gardening, prefer low maintenance garden
DIY skills, enjoyment and available time
. . .

Then look at what’s available and consider where it fits with your own priorities.

beauf

I think the price different where you are is extreme. Where I am its much closer, maybe only 100-150k in the difference.

Ray Palmer

https://m.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/42a-elm-mount-park-beaumont-dublin-9/4317077

Great house but way more then the properties beside it

Claw Hammer

The first issue is whether you are comparing an established area with a developing area. In an established area, the facilities will have been put in years ago. Convenience shops, bus stops and other community facilities. I had colleagues who bought in newly developing areas years ago. They had to lobby for new bus routes, they had to lobby and fund raise to get schools built. new sports clubs were established and took years to develop properly.
Compare to an established area. Schools all built and no pressure on number. Convenience stores operating. Sports clubs long established and welcoming new members.Public transport issues, street lighting etc all sorted.

Mad_maxx

If quality of finish is your only priority, the new house every time, if anything the price differential should be wider, such is the complete labour famine, doing up a place costs a fortune

My only concern is the compulsory social housing thing, local authorities house troublemakers first

Fian

Older houses are generally better imo. Especially if it is a Semi-D or terraced house, the older houses will have thicker walls and better (sound) insulation. If they are a bit run down looking cosmetic issues are easy to address and you can get much better value. I think the ideal house to buy is one that has been let go by an older resident with crappy wallpaper on the walls and old fashioned decor. Can easily be changed and you can get a better house than you could afford ordinarily. I'm over 20 years in my house, but it was built sometime in the 40s I think. It was old fashioned, we needed to rewire and replumb it, and i will never forget the struggle of removing layers of wallpaper, but it was a great buy for exactly those reasons. Only problem is the walls are really difficult to drill into, the old blocks are so strong and they seem to contain stones mixed in with the concrete.

You can be reasonably confident that if the house remains structurally sound after 30 years it is not about to deteriorate suddenly. Unlike new builds where issues like pyrite etc. can become apparent a few years down the road.

Go old enough and you need to establish whether the wiring/plumbing are up to modern standards.

dubrov

Ray Palmer wrote: »

https://m.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/42a-elm-mount-park-beaumont-dublin-9/4317077

Great house but way more then the properties beside it

In fairness, there are loads of closeby properties on the PP register that sold for about 400k and are about 90m2 in size.
That one is about 70% larger and new so price doesn't look way off.

JustMe,K

beauf wrote: »

Anyone I know who has done and extension or rebuild an older house has done,

Converted the Attic,
Extended out the Kitchen/dining rooms to a open plan design.
Replaced the plumbing.
Replaced the electrics
Replaced the insulation
Replaced the heating system.
New Windows and Doors.
Built an outside patio area ( slabbed, and no one is using timbder decking)
Optionally crearted and office, and rewired for ethernet and wall mounted TVs
Optionaly got rid of the fireplace.
I haven't seen any refurbs use solar. Only new builds seem to have solar.
new furniture.

I would say most are spending 50~100k. But you have to be careful as the money you put in is almost never going to come back in a sale.
As the house is only worth so much.

I have friends who have just done the above with the exception of the attic and the patio, however the patio is on the list of jobs to be done, and the addition of 2 bathrooms with no change out of 90k. They are lucky that the house would actually stand them the purchase and refurb price if they were to sell right now, but there is no way to know what the future holds.

Ray Palmer

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I agree that all sounds about right. The thing I am pointing out is the houses are €250k-€300k difference in price for new houses. While some mentioned attics having rooms some of these rooms aren't deemed habitable due to building regs. So they are trying to suggest these are extra bedrooms but not stating it.
This seems to be new as there were new builds in the areas but not a huge price difference.

That would very much be the exception, I see houses selling of the plans in an area I’m familiar with 3 beds are around 330k, existing houses 15 years old or so in the area are up around 280k and the new houses would be much higher spec.

riclad

Old houses may be bigger than a new house ,
it might have a bigger garden.
New house ,you know exactly how much it will cost,
you dont have to bid on the house .
You dont have to spend money on insulation , new windows ,re wiring,plumping, etc
old houses may be closer to bus stop, train station, shops

there,s old house,s all over the place, the range of places to buy a new
house is limited .
You might get a 2 bed or 1 bed old house alot cheaper than buying a new house .
if you buy a house from the 70s, ,80,s you will very likely have to put in more insulation .

JohnnyChimpo

Zain Nervous Musketeer wrote: »

That would very much be the exception, I see houses selling of the plans in an area I’m familiar with 3 beds are around 330k, existing houses 15 years old or so in the area are up around 280k and the new houses would be much higher spec.

area?

Nikki Sixx

omerin wrote: »

What a vile, ignorant generalisation.

It’s true though. You will be living next to somebody smoking outside her front door in her pajamas, who has three feral kids and pays €40 a week to rent her €500,000 home. Meanwhile you and your partner work your asses off to meet the mortgage, bills and put food on the table.

Abba987

Nikki Sixx wrote: »

It’s true though. You will be living next to somebody smoking outside her front door in her pajamas, who has three feral kids and pays €40 a week to rent her €500,000 home. Meanwhile you and your partner work your asses off to meet the mortgage, bills and put food on the table.

100% true like it or not. Been there done that. Coming home from a days work to get into housework homework and prep for next day and they having the crack with their few cans well on in the front garden. Generally intimadting. Couldn't Let my kids out to play

Didn't give a monkeys about rubbish. Parked wherever as did the ever stream of mates

This is my experience with social housing in a new build. I'm sure I'm far from alone. Give me an older settled area any day .

The chances of living beside such is much higher in new estates

ETA not just one house. This was a community of them owning the place cos they were there all day while the gobshxxes went out to work

riclad

New house,s should be higher spec as they are built to higher standards
of insulation , re sound insulation and heat insulation,
the windows and doors should be better designed than a house from the 70s .
Some old houses will have higher roofs than the standard new house built in 2019.
My friend looked at a house 12 years ago,
it needed a lot of work, terrace type house,dublin 2
but the garden was very large , 16 x 30ft ,
it would have been a great investment if he had bought it.
If you do research you can find out is there social housing near the house you intend to buy,
old houses in certain area,s tend to be settled ,
eg the city council do not tend to buy old houses in single units in the coombe for example,
they might get 10 per cent of houses in part of a new build estate ,
and they will be in one corner of the site .
The council do not like to buy houses that are like 50 years old that will need a lot of work to bring up to modern standards,
eg new door,s and windows ,new heating system etc

Dolbhad

Abba987 wrote: »

100% true like it or not. Been there done that. Coming home from a days work to get into housework homework and prep for next day and they having the crack with their few cans well on in the front garden. Generally intimadting. Couldn't Let my kids out to play

Didn't give a monkeys about rubbish. Parked wherever as did the ever stream of mates

This is my experience with social housing in a new build. I'm sure I'm far from alone. Give me an older settled area any day .

The chances of living beside such is much higher in new estates

ETA not just one house. This was a community of them owning the place cos they were there all day while the gobshxxes went out to work

First thing I checked when I was looking at new build. The sales man was very honest and told exactly what houses were part v (I’ve known others who were not told) It was a small estate of 80 houses. 10 were given to council which would be to the side of us. Wouldn’t have put a deposit down if the house next to me or behind me was a part v house.

I grew up in a council estate and my parents are still there. Different in 80’s as most of the parents in the estate worked but on low incomes or work in trade so had bouts of unemployment. Never had any issues. Our estate has expanded over the years and the types in social houses in last 15 years had changed dramatically and had really made me wary as huge issues with fights, parties, music level, rubbish and childrens’ behaviour.

Builder said the plan was the part v houses would be last to built but due to pressure from the government on social housing needs, they would actually be built in phase 2 than the last phase. Put me off also that those who could buy a house were delayed over this.

In the end we decided against new build and would rather pay more for a second hand house with a garden and in a mature settled estate and carry out the work. We don’t have kids yet so we don’t need turn key. But I think that’s a key issues in debate for new build vs older house.