FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Cheslyn View Last year one of these houses sold for ........Wait for it...............£749,700 Remember, it's all "Safe as houses" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deano Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Cheslyn ViewLast year one of these houses sold for ........Wait for it...............£749,700 Remember, it's all "Safe as houses" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are you sure, thats an horrific loss!. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTB Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Cheslyn ViewLast year one of these houses sold for ........Wait for it...............£749,700 Remember, it's all "Safe as houses" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jeez, wasn't sure if that was a typo, Nethouseprices... 3 Cheslyn View, 63, Nascot Wood Road £749,700 21 Jun 2004 Isn't it a Terraced house?! *cough* Tulips! *cough* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBEAR Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Are you sure, thats an horrific loss!.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yep, It all checks out on nethouseprices Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I'm intrigued by this - firstly, who wants a four bed *terrace*? Secondly, who'd pay more than about 250k for those? It's in Watford, for crying out loud, not Lytham St. Annes or Westminster. Perhaps the pictures don't, er, do it justice, it looks like a dump to me from the front, in a kind of ex-local authority way, regardless of what the interior looks like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KTeetwo Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Are you sure, thats an horrific loss!.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just a thought - no evidence to back it up - but could it have been that No3 was a detached house in its own grounds and was sold in June 04 with planning permission for four link houses and the rightmove price refers to plots 1-4 at the former No 3 Cheslyn View. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Are you sure, thats an horrific loss!.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nascot Wood really is an Elite area, all the houses are HUGE and you've got to have a good few quid to live there. This developement as you can see it gated but yes, at the end of the day they are four bed terraced. Picture 9 of 9 shows you the actual outside of the development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Just a thought - no evidence to back it up - but could it have been that No3 was a detached house in its own grounds and was sold in June 04 with planning permission for four link houses and the rightmove price refers to plots 1-4 at the former No 3 Cheslyn View.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nah, these were built ground upwards - I've been watchin the whole area Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guy_Montag Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Just a thought - no evidence to back it up - but could it have been that No3 was a detached house in its own grounds and was sold in June 04 with planning permission for four link houses and the rightmove price refers to plots 1-4 at the former No 3 Cheslyn View.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> looking at the brochure, there are 4 identical houses in the terrace. I doubt no 3 was detached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ah-so Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Nascot Wood really is an Elite area, all the houses are HUGE <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is still Watford, so how "elite" can it be? Also the house in question is not huge. There may be 4 bedrooms, but they are pretty small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 It is still Watford, so how "elite" can it be? Also the house in question is not huge. There may be 4 bedrooms, but they are pretty small.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jesus some of you guys are serious snobs! Sorry but EVERY area has something unsavory about it. This is Cassio / Nascot wood side of Watford. Get in the car and go and have a look rather then rattle out these "Its not very Kensington and Mayfair is it" type of comments! :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guy_Montag Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I think one of my friends is going to write to no.3 & let them know. I wouldn't be so cruel, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planit Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I've looked through all the photos and tried really hard to like these houses but no I can't You just cant get away from the fact that it looks like a modern housing estate. So no matter how good the area is for 700k you can get a 4 bed that is a) detached is attractive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 I've looked through all the photos and tried really hard to like these houses but no I can'tYou just cant get away from the fact that it looks like a modern housing estate. So no matter how good the area is for 700k you can get a 4 bed that is a) detached is attractive <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No one said you had to like it, it's for illustration purposes! Peak of the market £749k 15 months later £469k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lochy Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 No one said you had to like it, it's for illustration purposes!Peak of the market £749k 15 months later £469k <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi Just want to point out that the 749k house that sold was a DETACHED house, not a terrace(according the nethouseprices). Looks like a Developer bought a detached house with grounds and built 4 houses on the plot(and will make a tidy sum). Therefore as an illustration, its a very very bad one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellenmyfanwy Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Just a thought - no evidence to back it up - but could it have been that No3 was a detached house in its own grounds and was sold in June 04 with planning permission for four link houses and the rightmove price refers to plots 1-4 at the former No 3 Cheslyn View.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Kteetwo,...i think you are right...a search for 3 cheslyn view brings up 2 & 3 for sale with exactly the same details as 1 & 4. The blurb goes on to say that they would be ready for completion in march 2005, so number 3 cannot be the same one referred to in the land registry sale in 2004.... i wish it was true tho.... but i think reality is is more truthful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I'm tempted to write to the person who paid 749k and do them a special deal on a website: 5 pages, up to 10 photos, hosting included for a year - a snip at £75,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 (edited) Hi Just want to point out that the 749k house that sold was a DETACHED house, not a terrace(according the nethouseprices). Looks like a Developer bought a detached house with grounds and built 4 houses on the plot(and will make a tidy sum). Therefore as an illustration, its a very very bad one.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I repeat, this development was built from the ground up. It's not a conversion of any kind. I'm going for an error in the land registry. They've been there for ages and ages, so the chances of the land being aquired in 2004 and FOUR houses built in a matter of months is pretty slim. Also, net houses specifically states it was Number 3 that was sold. Edited September 15, 2005 by FrozenOut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lochy Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I repeat, this development was built from the ground up.It's not a conversion of any kind. I'm going for an error in the land registry. They've been there for ages and ages, so the chances of the land being aquired in 2004 and FOUR houses built in a matter of months is pretty slim. Also, net houses specifically states it was Number 3 that was sold. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You argument has a few holes in it which I want to query First, If the development was built from the ground up, and is due for completion in Mar 2005(some months past) then how could a house have sold for £749,000, if it didn't exist? We have only you word for it that it didn't exist. All the facts point to the contrary. Secondly the houses were bought in Jun 2004. 15 months is plenty of time to build 4 houses. Thirdly, a land registry error is a bit strange, but at least you agree that this was not a massive fall in the market, and so is not a good illustration as I stated before. There are plenty of real examples of house prices falls/stagnation out there, so there is no need to create ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpidding Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 You argument has a few holes in it which I want to queryFirst, If the development was built from the ground up, and is due for completion in Mar 2005(some months past) then how could a house have sold for £749,000, if it didn't exist? We have only you word for it that it didn't exist. All the facts point to the contrary. Secondly the houses were bought in Jun 2004. 15 months is plenty of time to build 4 houses. Thirdly, a land registry error is a bit strange, but at least you agree that this was not a massive fall in the market, and so is not a good illustration as I stated before. There are plenty of real examples of house prices falls/stagnation out there, so there is no need to create ones. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree...this is a bit iffy. houseprices.co.uk says the one that sold for 750k was detached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 You argument has a few holes in it which I want to queryFirst, If the development was built from the ground up, and is due for completion in Mar 2005(some months past) then how could a house have sold for £749,000, if it didn't exist? We have only you word for it that it didn't exist. All the facts point to the contrary. Secondly the houses were bought in Jun 2004. 15 months is plenty of time to build 4 houses. Thirdly, a land registry error is a bit strange, but at least you agree that this was not a massive fall in the market, and so is not a good illustration as I stated before. There are plenty of real examples of house prices falls/stagnation out there, so there is no need to create ones. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1) It's been completed ages and ages, the information on Right move is wrong - Fact. 2) Yes you have only got my word for it, but I've been driving past it at least once a week for well over a a year - I live 10 minutes from here, you don't. 3) Houses? Plural ? Net house prices only claims ONE of the houses has been sold, I would imagine a second house has sold just after the land reg figures were released - or it could be reserved, that much we don't know and to be honest it makes no odds does it? I've got a really good idea for you, instead of being a keyboard warrior and trying to discredit me, ring up the developers and ask them to explain it to you, when you've done that drop me a PM with your apology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 I agree...this is a bit iffy. houseprices.co.uk says the one that sold for 750k was detached.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> It states that NUMBER THREE was sold for £749k not the house or houses or anything else, Number THREE Cheslyn View sold £749k The fact that ONE piece of information (Detached) is incorrect makes you think this is all miss judged? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lochy Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 1) It's been completed ages and ages, the information on Right move is wrong - Fact.2) Yes you have only got my word for it, but I've been driving past it at least once a week for well over a a year - I live 10 minutes from here, you don't. 3) Houses? Plural ? Net house prices only claims ONE of the houses has been sold, I would imagine a second house has sold just after the land reg figures were released - or it could be reserved, that much we don't know and to be honest it makes no odds does it? I've got a really good idea for you, instead of being a keyboard warrior and trying to discredit me, ring up the developers and ask them to explain it to you, when you've done that drop me a PM with your apology. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Okay, soooooo.............. The information on RightMove is wrong The land Registry is wrong, Nethouseprices is wrong but you're right. Have I got it now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenOut Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Okay, soooooo..............The information on RightMove is wrong The land Registry is wrong, Nethouseprices is wrong but you're right. Have I got it now? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jesus, where does nethouseprices get their information from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lochy Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Jesus, where does nethouseprices get their information from?<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Its the land registry. I thought everyone knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.