ᐅ Homebuilding Forum – Would You Choose to Buy or Build a House Again?
Created on: 11 Dec 2015 11:09
X
xycrazy
Hello,
we are about to sign the contract with the developer but have started seriously reconsidering whether we should go through with it.
We negotiated for 8 months and were quite sure about it. However, towards the end, some issues arose regarding the contract and other matters, which we managed to resolve.
It now looks like we would be paying a third of our net income to the bank for 22 years. I think we can afford it. But when you are used to paying monthly rent of about €800-900 (divided by 2), this is quite a different level.
With a house, it’s not just the loan payments; there are ongoing maintenance costs as well. From what we’ve read, this is roughly €2-3 per m² (about 0.2-0.3 per sq ft) per month. So that’s another €400-500 per month. And, of course, there is much more work involved too.
Admittedly, this is stressing us out quite a bit, especially my partner. She is worried about the heavy financial burden each month. Is that justified?
We don’t want to live just for the house; we want to go on vacations, avoid problems with children, and so on. As I said, the current situation is manageable, but we wonder if we might be underestimating the costs.
So here’s my question to the community: looking back at everything you know now about loans, maintenance costs, upkeep, and so forth, would you buy or build a house again?
If yes, why? If not, why not? I’m really interested to hear your thoughts! And were there any surprises—positive or negative—that you didn’t expect?
Regards
we are about to sign the contract with the developer but have started seriously reconsidering whether we should go through with it.
We negotiated for 8 months and were quite sure about it. However, towards the end, some issues arose regarding the contract and other matters, which we managed to resolve.
It now looks like we would be paying a third of our net income to the bank for 22 years. I think we can afford it. But when you are used to paying monthly rent of about €800-900 (divided by 2), this is quite a different level.
With a house, it’s not just the loan payments; there are ongoing maintenance costs as well. From what we’ve read, this is roughly €2-3 per m² (about 0.2-0.3 per sq ft) per month. So that’s another €400-500 per month. And, of course, there is much more work involved too.
Admittedly, this is stressing us out quite a bit, especially my partner. She is worried about the heavy financial burden each month. Is that justified?
We don’t want to live just for the house; we want to go on vacations, avoid problems with children, and so on. As I said, the current situation is manageable, but we wonder if we might be underestimating the costs.
So here’s my question to the community: looking back at everything you know now about loans, maintenance costs, upkeep, and so forth, would you buy or build a house again?
If yes, why? If not, why not? I’m really interested to hear your thoughts! And were there any surprises—positive or negative—that you didn’t expect?
Regards
I believe that dealing with salespeople is like with any other profession… there are good ones and bad ones.
I would guess that most work on high commissions and therefore try hard to sell, reacting accordingly if a customer doesn’t buy, even after a lot of effort invested. You have to keep in mind that they probably already know every type of customer archetype.
We had mixed experiences with the large general contractors. We noticed that they all have to stay within their standard offerings, and you can unsettle them a bit by asking questions outside of their typical scope – for example, “Can we have interior walls made of sand-lime bricks?” How do they respond?
a) they simply say “no, that’s not part of the program”
b) they explain why it wouldn’t make sense anyway, hoping the customer will accept that
Both answers are less than ideal – salespeople surely know that too and probably get annoyed. Honestly, I would be as well...
With Stadt-Land Haus, we felt we were treated fairly honestly within the constraints, although the salesperson was a bit slick; what didn’t work was their somewhat clumsy way of developing the floor plan.
At Viebrockhaus, I think the salesperson was simply overworked and not very interested in our questions about the heating concept – looking back, we may have judged him too harshly. The newer Viebrockhaus houses apparently work well with air-to-water heat pumps.
The Helma salesperson seemed to be the most competent and experienced. He immediately planned for 50 extra power outlets and openly pointed out weaknesses in the materials and construction scope descriptions. However, their poor online reviews were the downfall here.
We had a maximum of three appointments in total.
It took us about 14 months from the initial idea “we could build” – including all detours like looking at used properties, attending fairs, etc. – to signing the contract.
I would guess that most work on high commissions and therefore try hard to sell, reacting accordingly if a customer doesn’t buy, even after a lot of effort invested. You have to keep in mind that they probably already know every type of customer archetype.
We had mixed experiences with the large general contractors. We noticed that they all have to stay within their standard offerings, and you can unsettle them a bit by asking questions outside of their typical scope – for example, “Can we have interior walls made of sand-lime bricks?” How do they respond?
a) they simply say “no, that’s not part of the program”
b) they explain why it wouldn’t make sense anyway, hoping the customer will accept that
Both answers are less than ideal – salespeople surely know that too and probably get annoyed. Honestly, I would be as well...
With Stadt-Land Haus, we felt we were treated fairly honestly within the constraints, although the salesperson was a bit slick; what didn’t work was their somewhat clumsy way of developing the floor plan.
At Viebrockhaus, I think the salesperson was simply overworked and not very interested in our questions about the heating concept – looking back, we may have judged him too harshly. The newer Viebrockhaus houses apparently work well with air-to-water heat pumps.
The Helma salesperson seemed to be the most competent and experienced. He immediately planned for 50 extra power outlets and openly pointed out weaknesses in the materials and construction scope descriptions. However, their poor online reviews were the downfall here.
We had a maximum of three appointments in total.
It took us about 14 months from the initial idea “we could build” – including all detours like looking at used properties, attending fairs, etc. – to signing the contract.
BeHaElJa schrieb:
With Stadt-Land-Haus, we felt the framework was handled very honestly, although the salesperson was somewhat slick – what didn’t work was the rather clumsy approach to developing the floor plan.
The Helma sales representative seemed the most competent and experienced. He immediately planned an additional 50 sockets as a standard and openly pointed out the weaknesses in the materials and construction specification. In the end, it was the poor online reviews that caused us to reject them. For us, Stadt-Land-Haus lost out when they quoted a flat fee of 2,000 euros for earthworks (including disposal and transportation).
With the next two providers, we initially thought they were trying to overcharge us, as their prices were between 25,000 and 35,000 euros. When the third and fourth quotes were in the same range, Stadt-Land-Haus was eliminated due to unreliable information.
Helma: Their consultants at the show home parks made a very good impression. They took their time and addressed our questions and wishes. However, this was still in the pre-planning phase, when we weren’t even sure whether the project would go ahead or what exactly we wanted. As a result of these talks, Helma briefly rose to the top of our preferred builder list. The decline happened with the consultant who came to visit us for more in-depth discussions. From our point of view, his information was insufficient; although he had his laptop with him, he was unwilling or unable to look up any information when asked, gave us prices while mentioning they would soon increase by 3% (for the originally planned basement, this would have actually meant a surcharge of over 20%, with other items around 7-10%), and so forth.
This conversation effectively disqualified Helma in our eyes.
schubert7931 Dec 2015 11:50How did it turn out?
U
Username_wahl16 Oct 2017 09:01House construction: You pay an outrageous amount of money (in our case 500,000 €) and then spend years dealing with poor workmanship.
It’s hard to say if you would go through it again. Next time, only with a building savings contract and a specialized lawyer by your side (although they probably wouldn’t have prevented some issues either!).
It’s hard to say if you would go through it again. Next time, only with a building savings contract and a specialized lawyer by your side (although they probably wouldn’t have prevented some issues either!).
C
chand198616 Oct 2017 11:28Wow, a nice thread that suddenly popped up for me here.
As—at least currently—a convinced and also happy renter, I represent a definite minority position.
I deliberately put forward a provocative thesis: The gain in freedom that most homebuilders associate with building their own house is an illusion. On the contrary, renting offers significantly more freedom.
What? Yes, you heard that right!
I see two competing views of freedom here.
a) For the committed homebuilder, the focus is on design freedom—to create a living space that best meets individual needs, without having to accept restrictions imposed by a landlord. For this, they are willing to commit to a location and take on 20–30 year obligations with a bank. Furthermore, they often accept significant limitations in wealth building and thus retirement planning (depending on the size and location of the property).
b) For the committed renter, the focus is on mobility freedom and financial freedom. Career opportunities linked to changing jobs are not hindered by the burden of owner-occupied property. Also: Being able to tell an unpleasant employer off and, if necessary, downsize easily, or dare the financially uncertain step of becoming self-employed—none of these are easily done when you have house-related obligations that don't allow a temporary reduction in cash flow. So this freedom is given up to the house. If you live in a rural area where resale is harder than in urban locations, you become a slave to your property.
So, one can see that there is a trade-off between different kinds of freedom and that a well-established life plan and basic financial knowledge are needed to make the right decision. Then, despite the respective disadvantages, either living concept can bring joy.
I’m in favor of everyone doing what makes them happy. But for this, it is essential to have all the above-mentioned advantages and disadvantages clearly in mind to make a proper balance.
Sometimes—and I truly mean this constructively—I feel this is not the case. For example, when young people under 30 (and I’m hardly older myself) finance something rural for over 30 years and even partly believe that once they no longer pay rent, they have secured retirement savings.
Only when they know this is wrong and still want to build in good conscience are they truly committed homebuilders whose decision will bring them happiness!
I don’t want to offend anyone here, but I do want to challenge the filter bubble that I think I can read out of some posts in this thread. No hard feelings to all homebuilders!
As—at least currently—a convinced and also happy renter, I represent a definite minority position.
I deliberately put forward a provocative thesis: The gain in freedom that most homebuilders associate with building their own house is an illusion. On the contrary, renting offers significantly more freedom.
What? Yes, you heard that right!
I see two competing views of freedom here.
a) For the committed homebuilder, the focus is on design freedom—to create a living space that best meets individual needs, without having to accept restrictions imposed by a landlord. For this, they are willing to commit to a location and take on 20–30 year obligations with a bank. Furthermore, they often accept significant limitations in wealth building and thus retirement planning (depending on the size and location of the property).
b) For the committed renter, the focus is on mobility freedom and financial freedom. Career opportunities linked to changing jobs are not hindered by the burden of owner-occupied property. Also: Being able to tell an unpleasant employer off and, if necessary, downsize easily, or dare the financially uncertain step of becoming self-employed—none of these are easily done when you have house-related obligations that don't allow a temporary reduction in cash flow. So this freedom is given up to the house. If you live in a rural area where resale is harder than in urban locations, you become a slave to your property.
So, one can see that there is a trade-off between different kinds of freedom and that a well-established life plan and basic financial knowledge are needed to make the right decision. Then, despite the respective disadvantages, either living concept can bring joy.
I’m in favor of everyone doing what makes them happy. But for this, it is essential to have all the above-mentioned advantages and disadvantages clearly in mind to make a proper balance.
Sometimes—and I truly mean this constructively—I feel this is not the case. For example, when young people under 30 (and I’m hardly older myself) finance something rural for over 30 years and even partly believe that once they no longer pay rent, they have secured retirement savings.
Only when they know this is wrong and still want to build in good conscience are they truly committed homebuilders whose decision will bring them happiness!
I don’t want to offend anyone here, but I do want to challenge the filter bubble that I think I can read out of some posts in this thread. No hard feelings to all homebuilders!