Hey folks, I plan to move to Seattle from Bay Area and buy a house there, will be getting married next year. Spouse is from India so only single income for next few years. So I was thinking it's better to get old house as they might be a bit cheaper. Experienced home owners any cons of buying old property like extra maintenance cost. I think I am good with tools and willing to learn basic maintenance so will that be helpful? TC 160
There are few new constructions in bay area. Most are either built on chemical wastelands, are in remote areas, or are extremely expensive. Your call
Don't plan to live here in Bay Area. I know cannot sustain with my little TC and single income. I am looking to move to Portland or Seattle.
Imo, they both have strengths and weaknesses. With new construction, the foundation may shift through no fault of yours, or other issues that there is no way of predicting. In my opinion, make sure you have a good realtor, learn about the risks, and tour everything regardless of age. Make sure you tackle the biggest risks of old houses head on: make sure any buried oil tank has been dealt with, any knob and tube wiring has been decommissioned, etc. You are going to turn down way more old houses for basic stuff like cramped bathrooms than serious maintenance issues.
Old house here can cost more than a new house. Just buy a new house for 5-600k and call it a day
Hundred year old house needs a lot of maintenance. I spent about 7-10% revenue maintaining the house.
New construction if you just want a house, don’t want too many headaches, and aren’t too picky about location. New or used requires maintenance. A new home you might still need to work on the yard, or other elements on the exterior. There might also be minimal interior upgrades to make life better... but set aside at least 1% of the home value for maintenance - now or saving for the future. An old home, you can get character and location. But the higher cost. You can buy old homes newly renovated (good or bad... depends on how the job was done), an in-fill newly built home in an old neighborhood, and anything in between. I’d pick on location, and then house price - and then budget for maintenance+mortgage+propertytax+insurance.
At least in LA you can save about $100-$200k for an older home with zero upgrades. Fine if you don’t mind shag carpeting and wood paneling everywhere. If you ummm know a foreign language remodeling isn’t that bad but be prepared to pay out the nose for white contractors. I’ve literally saved thousands just because my wife is a native Chinese speaker.
Big mistake - moving from the Bay Area to Seattle. Remember this advice during the long winters.
I got a renoed 1930 house. Sturdy as fuck. Super happy
Where
Precision matters how. Define old. 10? 50? 100? New construction limits where you can live. You need a new development for those. New development in an infill lot is an exercise in extravagance.
Tech Industry
Yesterday
1937
TESLA UP 14% AFTER HOURS 🎉🎉🎉🎉
Tech Industry
Yesterday
2301
ByteDance is officially fucked
India
Yesterday
587
How to save India from destruction?
Tech Industry
4h
668
Is Amazon really that bad if you work 60-80 hour weeks anyway?
Tech Industry
Yesterday
678
The new Tesla Model 3 P goes from 0-60 in 2.9 seconds
I don’t think house price would be significantly low for new vs old.
Ok but sometimes properties do popup which need little maintenance and are a bit cheaper. Want to save as much as possible.