Buying a house without a mortgage loan

Sorry Kati, but you are heading in the wrong direction here. You can live well in older houses, but a lot doesn’t add up here. If an apartment costs at least 1000€ rent, a comparable sized house in decent condition cannot be sold for 125k. It just doesn’t work out at all, because renting the house would lead to rental yields well over 5%. You don’t get that with current interest rates for a new purchase. It only works out if the seller has absolutely no clue about the business and misjudges by a large factor. But I wouldn’t base my calculations for a home on that without thoroughly inspecting the house beforehand. No one here begrudges anyone fulfilling their homeownership dream with an existing property. But it is simply much more likely that the house will become a money pit than being a bargain. If something sounds too good to be true, it almost always is.

From what I read, the seller is already somewhat older. With old houses in rental, there is always something. As a landlord, you’re responsible for every little thing. Then the railway tracks right next door - hard to find a tenant, frequent tenant turnover is pre-programmed. As a grandma, I would have no desire for that at all. And as an investor, you don’t want to take that on either. This is more something for do-it-yourselfers, accordingly priced. I find that quite plausible.

This is more for do-it-yourselfers, accordingly it is priced. I find that quite plausible.

If someone wants to tackle this as a major core renovation project and knows what they are getting into, go ahead. But the OP is not talking about doing it themselves. The OP is saying that the heating system is new and the house is basically fine. The OP is saying that he has wasted all his money so far and has now miraculously changed. And that houses in the sticks are practically given away. Good houses in the sticks are not given away, only those with a lot of work and investment needed. Houses in good condition cost accordingly more because every reasonable person knows how much work and money it takes to make something decent out of a 100k house that won't constantly eat money over the next few years.

You only read things you want to read. You have never asked anything in any way. Instead, you only talked everything down. Unlike some others here, we don't have a huge income and yet I have a savings rate of about 30-40% and that with 3 children! We don't drive a car, have no expensive hobbies, don't smoke or drink. And now we save 1-1500€ monthly. Jealous, huh? But since I cannot finance a luxury villa for 600k with my income, I am fully aware. That I want to buy and modernize/renovate a house for 125k, that apparently doesn't suit you?!? I have never written in any way that the house as it is now is completely fine. But I cannot afford a core renovation of 200k on top, so it will be a modernization/renovation of just under 75k. For now. Apart from that, I am not writing for the first time that I want to have an expert survey it first to see if I am not terribly overextending myself. My question has been answered and honestly, WilderSueden, I no longer want to read answers from you because they have absolutely no merit at all, because you have no idea about my finances, my plans, or anything.

The area next to the house is even, according to the seller, building land.

Not worth a penny. At that distance from the railway line, you won't get any residential construction approved without significant structural effort.

Approvals are an important keyword. If I were you, I would make sure to have the approval documents available. So residential buildings, no illegal constructions. Because a change of use or change approval will no longer be granted at that distance from the railway. This basically applies to anything requiring approval that you might want to do on the property or with the house.

Good houses out in the sticks are not given away, only those that require a lot of work and investment.

You can't generalize that. In the way the OP describes it, such houses definitely exist at that price, without having to be a dilapidated, crooked shack ready for demolition. It's simply open countryside...
We sold my parents-in-law's house, and despite the huge plot, the buyers didn't pay much more. The plot was extremely awkwardly shaped and practically unusable other than as fragmented garden space, plus the location wasn't exactly an up-and-coming area, comparable to the one the OP describes.
Nevertheless, a young couple bought it; they were the only interested parties because it was cheap near the family, they definitely wanted to stay there, which was an advantage for them. They reroofed the house, installed new windows, and gradually renovated every room. It will never be a new building; depending on their mood, they either work on it or not.

Right next to the tracks, in the middle of nowhere (I know the area), buyers certainly aren’t lining up, and you can be glad to find the one for whom it fits. If the structure is basically okay and the renovation is manageable, then I would do it.
Whether the house holds an unpleasant surprise, maybe not even the seller herself knows. But that’s the inspector’s job.
Long story short, I wouldn’t infer the extent of renovation just from the price in that region.

I actually have no plans for the property at all. She proudly mentioned that it is supposed to be building land. I don't really care because I don't want to develop this area anyway. Well, actually yes. That's the keyword, and I will inform myself if a purchase is considered. I would like to build a roof over the garage so that the area there can be used as a seating area all year round. I actually only want to use the property for chickens, the dog, and vegetables.

Edit: the OP is female by the way and more skilled in crafts than the husband.