Would you buy a house that had been flooded ?

[L and P]

I am interested in peoples opinions ( just for the sake of a good discussion to learn, I have no plans to buy)

I notice on realestate.com.au last night that several properties are listed for sale that went under in the floods. They need work doing obviously. It got me to thinking if you bought one obviously you wouldnt get insurance but what would be the other catches ?

L

 

[Perp]

if you bought one obviously you wouldnt get insurance but what would be the other catches ?

Not necessarily; Suncorp have paid out for two floods at our home and still cover us for flood.

 

[Rolf Latham]

got lots of cash I hope

Lenders arent too keen on these right now

ta

rolf'

 

[L and P]

Not necessarily; Suncorp have paid out for two floods at our home and still cover us for flood.

Really ? !

Yes we do have money available to buy and renovate. ( not looking at buying though)

 

[Amadio]

No. Not only would I never buy a house which has been in a flood but I wouldn't buy a house with the remote possiblity of being in a flood.

Having helped a friend clean up and seen the damage it does to a house plus the emotional damage of losing your entire possessions in thick disgusting sludge - just...no.

 

[mrsdawnrazor]

Depends where - i would pick one up in St Lucia if it was going cheap, as a student let, if the numbers stacked up and the cashflow was right. Its a risk but one I would be prepared to take if it fitted with the strategy.

 

[marg4000]

Just check that you can get flood insurance. Yes, Perp has been covered twice, but from memory she was a customer of the insurance company before the first flood and her property had no flood history.

I would NOT buy.

Experienced the 1974 floods when hubby's parents' house flooded and don't want to go through that again. Just the smell in 2011 was enough to make me sick all over again, and the mud....

We were very flood-level conscious when our son bought a home in Graceville last year and ensured he bought well above the 1974 levels, and as far as we could work out above 1893 levels. This was despite being treated as idiots by real estate agents who thought we were nuts to even think of flood.
Marg

 

[L and P]

I AM NOT BUYING

I just thought it was a good place to have a discussion about the pros and cons, learning for me

I would think if you were a builder, or in a trade like cabinet making some of the properties might be a good, although risky buy.

I would hate to have any house I owned go under water, it would be devestating. Whether I was living in it or I had tenants in it.

 

[Nathan]

I plan to buy large amounts in later aprt of this year.

The details of my idea are still being processed in my head.

 

[Dazz]

....only for land value....cos after Yasi has finished with it, that's probably all that will be left.


As Bligh said, "I reckon someone upstairs might have someting against us Queenslanders".


Never mind, you can still flog the cockroaches at rugby league, and you run a pretty good second behind us in the mining stakes, so you're not all hopeless.

 

[Icarus]

I spoke to my mortgage broker about the possibility of purchasing something (flood affected) yesterday and came up against a bit of a stumbling block.

It seems certain major lenders are not approving any loans in flood affected areas at the moment. Even buyers that had finance approval prior to the flooding were put on hold and a bit of leg work was needed to get the contract to pass (property was not flood affected).

He seems to think that if/when these areas come off the radar, lenders will require a rather high LVR or substantial deposit (depending on your circumstances) to purchase one of these properties - then you'd have the extra expense of renovating along with the cost to cover repayments while the work was being completed.

If there is a way you could pick up something and have enough cash on hand to cover your costs, have tradesman contacts that could get in and do the work quickly, then you could do well out of it.

 

[Pa1nter]

I have renovated several homes that have been through floods,
The newer homes I would not buy,as they are made of gyprock,finger jointed skirtings, and are generally not so pretty after a few feet of water through them.

But the older homes on stumps (Doesn't matter how high) are fine,they wash out well,the mouldings are usually better quality,doors solid,kitchens solid,fibro or timber walls,

You can usually get in them,clean them out,dry them out,quick reno and they are ready for another 10 years.

 

[Perp]

The newer homes I would not buy,as they are made of gyprock,finger jointed skirtings, and are generally not so pretty after a few feet of water through them.

But surely people replace all the gyprock and skirtings and everything after they've been flooded, don't they?

If not...

 

[wylie]

But surely people replace all the gyprock and skirtings and everything after they've been flooded, don't they?

If not...

I think Painter is saying that in old Queenslanders you don't need to replace the walls and skirtings because they are usually solid timber, and unless they were sitting in water for a while (usually not, because they are off the ground) they could just be hosed out.

Gyprock on the other hand......

 

[Graingrower]

I'd imagine that flood damage might present an opportunity to buy a house cheap, especially with all the negative feedback you are getting here. You might even be able to raise a house above the flood level if it was built on stumps. I doubt that rental values would go down as much as property values might thereby increasing the investment return. Tradies are going to be hard to come by. If you were a tradie you would be too busy to do this as you would have so much work. Could be opportunity there.

 

[Pa1nter]

But surely people replace all the gyprock and skirtings and everything after they've been flooded, don't they?

If not...

I am sure that all the gyprock will be replaced with this current flooding in Brisbane due to the amount of mud involved,however the point I was making is if there was to be another similar event in the near future,the damage would not be so great,therefore the rent coming in would only be disrupted for a shorter amount of time compared to a newer house that could be disrupted for up to six months while it is being rebuilt.

 

[willair]

But the older homes on stumps (Doesn't matter how high) are fine,they wash out well,the mouldings are usually better quality,doors solid,kitchens solid,fibro or timber walls,

.

That's one item about fibro cement sheets,and hardwood blood wood frames from the stumps up too the top plates they don't move,and as long as you rip the eaves out and let the roof space air out then everything will settle back in line,most insurance companies should have that in the rebuild specs because gyprock just falls apart after a very short time in water ,and treated pine is useless,all the people i have helped so far in Rocklea,all the hardwood-fibro cement sheets are fine
anyone with gyprock just have a bare internal frame and will need a total refit..

 

[willair]

I am interested in peoples opinions ( just for the sake of a good discussion to learn, I have no plans to buy)

I notice on realestate.com.au last night that several properties are listed for sale that went under in the floods. They need work doing obviously. It got me to thinking if you bought one obviously you wouldnt get insurance but what would be the other catches ?

L

You will get insurance if you pay a premium well that's what i did and i'm still having problems with a Bank Run I nsurance Company,the only problem with some of those that went under and above the roofline like both we control did is,, once the stumps are blown and it starts
to spread and drop in black soil the bearers and joists move apart and drop first then the frame then the walls,so unless you have building experience,plus 6 weeks of free time,it would be better to bring in a "Caterpillar-D9"with several trucks buy a few cartoons of stout and level the site,and wake up the next day and start again..

 

[Perp]

I think Painter is saying that in old Queenslanders you don't need to replace the walls and skirtings

if there was to be another similar event in the near future,the damage would not be so great,therefore the rent coming in would only be disrupted for a shorter amount of time compared to a newer house that could be disrupted for up to six months while it is being rebuilt.

Oh, I see - you're talking about the potential work involved after the next flood. I thought you were saying that a home which had been flooded was worth less because the gyprock and skirting boards had been wet in the past. NOW I'm with you.