Timber framed 1980s houses: resale prospects

[bruce phipps]

Back in the 1980s World in Action ran a scare story about timber framed homes (specifically Barratt homes if I remember correctly) which caused resale values of these types of houses to plummet.

Is this still the case? Are buyers and mortgage lenders wary of such houses?

If I buy a 1980s Barratt timber framed home will I find it difficult to sell in the future? I am located in Yorks. Housing market is buoyant but I have a seen a detached house for sale which is slightly cheaper than market value... I know that these houses were timber framed ones built in the 1980s.

bruce

[Terry D]

I think that most houses in Scandinavia are timber framed. My first house was a Yuill timber frame semi and I found it excellent for heat insulation and soundproofing. I bought it for £3375 in 1969 and sold for £7400 after seven years. When I moved into a conventional (brick/concrete block construction), I was very disappointed with the levels of insulation (sound & heat) and even experienced damp patches on walls due to bridged ties in the walls. I then had to pay for cavity wall insualtion, which wasn't necessary in my previous timber frame. If I ever planned to build my own house, I would definitely go for a timber frame.

Terry D.

[Mary Fisher]

A daughter did her thesis on timber framed houses at this time and spent a lot of time researching the 'problem' houses featured in the story. It was, as these things always are, blown out of proportion by journalists and in any case the problems were isolated cases.

Timber framed houses have every possible advantage as far as I'm concerned, I'd love to live in one, better still to build one.

I don't know about that. Why not ask them?

I doubt it, memories won't go back as far as that and individual surveys would, I'd have thought, have more weight than reputation.

This is a diy group, if you have problems can't you see to them yourself? Timber framed houses per se aren't a problem. Think of those C14th ones which are still going strong ...

Mary

[John Laird]

Think of all the C14th ones that fell down or rotted away long long ago...

[Tony Bryer]

There's nothing wrong with timber frame - some advantages and some disadvantages over masonry construction. The crucial thing though IMO is that timber frame construction does require a higher standard of workmanship (particularly wrt clear cavities, vapour barriers and fire stopping) which was sadly lacking in those Barratt homes mentioned by the OP. Everything depends on the site agent appreciating what is required and enforcing it.

[Mary Fisher]

Not within the span of modern houses.

And most didn't rot or fall down, they were demolished to make way for something more modern.

Mary

[John Laird]

I'll be impressed with how you know this.

As you pointed out, the fittest survive. It does not automatically follow that they are representative of their generation. Just like old people.

[Mary Fisher]

I doubt that I could impress you. But I am an historian and have made a study of timber framed buildings.

I don't understand your point there!

Mary

>

[The Natural Philosopher]

Good timber frame is very good. I just built a massive one. Crap timber frame may be less so.

Barrat houses suffered from poor sound insulation and 'cardboard' internal walls. Its not too hard to improve that, but you can't eliminate it entirely.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

But the 14th century ones were made of real timber.

[John Laird]

Fairy nuff.

Merely that the assertion that "X is still around, therefore X is a sound design" is not exactly well-founded. I play golf regularly with a bunch of healthy active pensioners, but it would be wrong to deduce from that that either golf keeps you healthy or that there are lots of pensioners about. For all I know, they're the only ones left, and playing golf brought about the early demise of the rest :-)

[These are truly random sigs below, btw...]

[Janet Baraclough..]

The message from bruce [e-mail] (bruce phipps) contains these words:

My cousin found himself trapped inside his (new) Barratt living room after the door stuck and the handle fell off. So he thought he'd climb out of the window. While he was doing that, the entire window and frame fell out of the wall.

Janet.

[Mary Fisher]

I don't think I said that - but I'm not prepared to go back and look or to argue if you do.

But I doubt that regular houses won't be around in 600 years.

The key phrase there is: "For all I know". Proper, peer reviewed research might show the opposite :-)

I'd gathered that.

Mary

[Richard Faulkner]

In message , bruce phipps writes

I cant really answer the specific question for you, but if you look around, you will probably find lots of timber framed buildings, (houses & apartment blocks), being built right now, which suggests that the builders of new homes do not have a problem selling them.

It's also likely that lots of people will have forgotten about the story, which almost certainly focussed on the minority of property's with problems.

Can you tell whether there has been a steady flow of property sales on the estate over the years??

Having said that, if you have any doubts based upon actual evidence, dont do it - buy somewhere else. You will never forgive yourself if it goes wrong when you come to sell.

[Pete C]

Doubt it if they were made of Oak, more likely demolished in the name of 'progress'.

cheers, Pete.

[Mary Fisher]

But isn't buying a house about more than selling it ... ?

Mary

[Richard Faulkner]

In message , Mary Fisher writes

Yes, very much so IMO, but the OP asked the question, and I merely tried to answer it.

Funnily enough, one of the most common questions, when I was selling houses, was to do with resale in the future, so perhaps we are in a minority.

In reality, most people buy a house as a home, but with a substantial weighting given to future prospects when selling.

[Mary Fisher]

I doubt that we'll ever sell this, unless we're bedbound. We've been here for forty odd years and can't see a reason for moving.

A son was here earlier and we were talking about this, I opined that if our first house hadn't been coming down for 're-development' (it still isn't re-developed, it was slum clearance but they'd have had to pay us more compensation for that!) we'd probably still be there. It was a one up and down end terrace, cold water and lavvy down the street.

We're not ambitious, it was once said of us that our get-up-and-go got up and went.

To us a house is for living in between times, somewhere to come back to occasionally.

Mary

[Owain]

"Richard Faulkner" wrote | Mary Fisher writes | >But isn't buying a house about more than selling it ... ? | Yes, very much so IMO, but the OP asked the question, and I merely | tried to answer it. | Funnily enough, one of the most common questions, when I was selling | houses, was to do with resale in the future, so perhaps we are in a | minority. | In reality, most people buy a house as a home, but with a substantial | weighting given to future prospects when selling.

Not unreasonably, as for most people the liklihood is that they will move within a few years (job, etc) unlike our parents' or grandparents' generations who were much more likely to die in the street in which they were born.

And while in the past if you sold a house in one part of the country you were fairly confident you could buy something in another part, with house prices zooming all over the place, there is a real risk of buying a house or in an area that will not keep pace with the general housing market.

Owain

[Brett Jackson]

Still buiding them. Saw some flats go up in Pudsey (Leeds) recently that seemed to be timber framed. Would hate to think what would happen with a spot of woodworm going unnoticed for a few years as the timbers didn't seem particularly thick.