300 m², hillside location, built in 1963, buy or not?

Just to clarify: I have not visited the house so far. Anyone who quickly googles the address will find out that the builder was probably Winfrid Hedergott (who has a Wikipedia article). I don’t know what happened to the house after 2002.

I could do the floors and walls myself, but of course not the windows, heat pump, and potential insulation. Many floors, the hallway, and the swimming pool are fantastic. The swimming pool has probably not been in use for many years (the live pictures are scanned photos).

The plan would be for pure personal use; as an investment property, the house is of course unusable and will also be very difficult to sell. Thanks for the hint on that.

Zeiträuber, die einen Preis verhandeln und dann sagen "ich überlegs' noch" finde ich abstoßend.

I completely agree. That’s why a reality check in the forum first.

If I decide to at least do a viewing despite the massive risks, I will of course keep you updated. But my current gut feeling and many comments clearly point to "better not."

There is great parquet flooring, why should it be renewed?

Because he also wants to install underfloor heating.

Because he also wants to install underfloor heating.

And/or surface heating. Hopefully the latter in the rooms with parquet flooring.

What I would NEVER do with the property is to take the swimming pool out of operation.

I see it exactly the same way. Instead of closing it: attach a heat pump heating system and install a counterflow system.

Should I decide to do at least an inspection despite the massive risks, I will of course keep you updated. But my current gut feeling and many posts clearly point to "Better not."

The house does not pose any special risks. As with any house, the substance and the technical condition just need to be inspected once and then off you go. You just need a bit more of everything. That is calculable. It is the standard risk that the desire doesn’t fit the budget. The only special feature: While usually the purchase cost is the hurdle to overcome, here it is the running costs that have to be managed. As long as the income situation is permanently sufficiently secured, nothing stands in the way of a good life in this wonderful house.

Well, still, the note is allowed that a swimming pool means significant (!) ongoing costs and is rarely used in return. Despite all the enthusiasm for parts of the interior design, I gladly take off my rose-colored glasses at this point. A swimming pool, whether indoors or outdoors, is the epitome of luxury. In real estate, it even almost decreases the value because basically no one with a clear mind puts up with it ;-)

I am quite certain that we will buy a house at some point. However, this specific project was just a pragmatic solution for us; a dream house looks different to us. Therefore, I am happy for now that we have a clean slate. Besides the delays, there have also been professional changes for us. So we are waiting and focusing on other things until we feel like dealing with the house topic again.

I assume that the aforementioned time has now come, but this property is also not really the dream house.

Just to clarify: I have not visited the house so far. Anyone who quickly googles the address will find out that the builder was probably Winfrid Hedergott (he has a Wikipedia article). I don’t know what happened to the house after 2002.

Presumably, the widow received her bridge ladies in this museum of the late landlord’s status for a while after 2002, until their group biologically shrank. I assume the gentleman had a relationship with his younger secretary, who by now has also advanced to retirement home age. When the property was listed on the real estate portal, the house was probably already vacant, and photos were quickly taken while there was still something presentable left from the gardener’s most recent visit. Maintaining an empty stage costs money. The windows appear to be aluminum to me—basically eternally durable, but the first generation unfortunately still needs replacement because back then they installed one-piece profiles without thermal separation between the interior and exterior shells. The swimming pool is on one hand a "money pit that gobbles gold bars" — on the other hand, shutting it down would be a death blow to the market value of the property, pushing away an entire group of potential buyers. In a residential area, it will be difficult to get permission for a club operation, which might be the only economically viable use left. For continued single-family living at this location, modernization and demolition will probably balance out financially. The plot will not be usable by subdivision—I see that on both sides the entire undeveloped area will have to remain bounded by the actual building window and probably also by the tree-fall boundary at the rear. I see the backlog in modernization as a millstone mortgage that explains the seemingly low price. It serves the realtor more than a quick sale to hold the property in the portfolio for as long as possible. Eventually, it will decay, and then lie heavier and heavier in the showcase and afterward on the shelf. When the realtor then quits or demands payment for further viewing appointments, the heirs will put it on the market as an uncleared building plot. Security service costs, garden maintenance costs, vacancy costs (especially deterioration), and it is poorly suited as a refugee guest house for the district. The property serves interested parties and the realtor (still) as a nice viewing experience, that’s it. I would still indulge in the latter in your place, such opportunities are rare. Formulate an avatar of your dream house!