Ten of the 16 properties at Jardin de Haut, St Peter Port, have been sold, but deals on the remainder fell through for a variety of reasons.
POTENTIAL buyers have chosen not to invest in former States houses partly because of the cost of refurbishing them.
Some 16 properties at Jardin de Haut, St Peter Port, were put on the market in November.
Initial offers were received for all of them, but some have now become available again.
A Housing Department spokesman said a survey of the properties had revealed to some possible buyers that they were taking on more than they had first thought.
‘The results of the property surveys highlighted that the cost of refurbishment works were higher than envisaged by the purchasers,’ they said.
‘For economic reasons, therefore, a very small number of purchasers chose not to proceed.’
The spokesman said the cost of refurbishment would vary by property but that all of them require general upgrading and modernising.
The sale had also been affected by the credit crunch, which had made it more difficult to obtain a mortgage.
‘Another problem was the inability of purchasers to raise finance,’ said the spokesman.
‘The withdrawal of 95% LTV mortgages in late November particularly affected the ability of a small number of buyers to proceed.’
Six properties are now available.
They are on the market for between £225,000 and £240,000 for those with two bedrooms and £250,000 for those with three bedrooms.
One is being sold for £265,000 as it has a substantially larger garden.
In November, Housing minister Deputy Dave Jones said proceeds from the sales would be credited to the Corporate Housing Programme Fund to help pay for the development of new social housing by the Guernsey Housing Association.
‘In preparing the houses for sale, we have created designated parking for each property as well as separating the water supplies and resurfacing the estate road,’ said the Housing spokesman.
Article posted on 30th December, 2008 - 1.00pm
10 Article Comments
These properties should have been firstly offered to States Tenants at reduced rates. They should then be offered to younger islanders if not purchased by the former. Investors bulk buying property is bad. It inflates the market, and makes home buying even more unaffordable.
Report abuse
How about the states retaining these houses and spending money to bring them up to modern living standards.
These should be let to those that need them or is it a case of the Island is now so wealthy that the waiting list for families is now down to 0 then?
If so this is great news. However I believe there are hundreds waiting to move out of compact substandard conditions and start enjoying a family way of life.
If any readers fall into this category then do say because who knows maybe a states member may read your threads and actually do something positive for all of you.
No states owned properties should ever be sold unless there really is no use for them. Then my opinion would be different!
Report abuse
I am beginning to look for a house as a first time buyer. I saw these and didnt even bother reading any more about them.
It is common knowledge the states cover things up with a lick of paint.
If i am to commit to buying a house, i dont mind abit of renovation work, but some of those houses look like they should be knocked down and rebuilt.
I dont blame people for pulling out.
Report abuse
Expalain why should States Tenants get first dibs?
But I agree that they should be given to sold to genuine first time buyers and not speculators or property companies.
Report abuse
I agree, no States owned housing should be sold.
Far far cheaper to perform the work then build new housing!
False economy selling housing stock…
Report abuse
States houses should always have been offered to the existing tenants at very reasonable cost, as is the case in UK, but they are sold off at ridiculously high prices, just another example of the avarice within the system. The houses are so old and have paid for themselves many times over already yet costly to purchase and to refurbish as most, if not all, are in a poor state of repair and the states paint them to conceal all the cracks and defects. Same problems occurred some years ago with the passee, some of you may remember? Impossible for many to buy OR rent at these extortionate prices. It’s an outrage!!!!
Report abuse
Paul – [How about the states retaining these houses and spending money to bring them up to modern living standards.]
You mean like they have done/doing at L’Aumone!. I heard a story recently that tenants in those houses are having to live and pay rent whilst electricians pull up floor boards etc.. to re-wire the whole property. Total inconvenience for 5days, especially to those who are retired. They are expected to remove items from the rooms in preparation, if they fail to do so they have be warned they will be billed for the removal.
Perhaps the costs are higher when properties are empty!
Report abuse
Im a states house tenant,and i have to say when the workman were doing our re-wiring they were brilliant, i can not fault them.They moved items that were to large for myself(i;m a single working mum)and on returning from work they had cleared up and returned furniture back. It be no different in the private rental sector.
Report abuse
Devils Advocate
The point I was making is the fact that there are hundreds of families waiting for a home so that they can lead a lifestyle that’s half decent rather than merely existing in substandard conditions.
Furthermore I don’t know many pensioners or single mothers that move substantial furniture into and out of rooms for the record!
Report abuse
mumof2 – ‘on returning from work’, but I believe some tenants are retired and stay at home, but have no choice but accept the imposed inconvenience. Whereas, in the private sector, this type of work could not proceed without the tenant agreeing (having been induced with either, suitable alternative accommodation or zero rent for a period) or wait for the lease to expire.
Report abuse