Evaluation of a single-family house built in 1982 with a questionable floor plan

The attic is completely paneled with wood, how can the condition be assessed?

Well, if you can't look inside, then only indicators like water stains remain. I do think that a professional has a much more practiced eye and knows what to look out for. For example, they can also measure the moisture in the basement. That is better than a layperson who only pays attention to a musty smell and just touches something somewhere, then has to realize after moving in that everything in the basement is rotting. But I don't want to spread panic now. The others here have already written that at first everything looks fine.

First of all: I can't open all the pictures, but those that are included in the offer and the floor plans... while loading I read your posts.

I have never lived in a bungalow, I have doubts about living on one level. Otherwise, hallway way too big, living room comparatively a bit too small, bedroom with window to the terrace I find strange, kitchen hard to furnish because there is a door to the garden to the second terrace, but then too little space to put shoes when going to the garden. Opening the kitchen/living room wall doesn’t make furniture placement any easier either.

If that is really your opinion, then the house is not for you at all.
It will not make you happy.

Together with the low roof pitch it looks quite brutal, like a typical building from the 70s.

70s style is a style that can be very distinctive, but simply isn’t mainstream for young people (I don’t even like this word, but it fits here), not “modern” enough in their eyes – even though it IS very modern. I count this house to that style despite some faux pas/building sins.

The other thing is that I actually find some aspects of the building ugly.

Oops, yes… it is and will never be your house.

Roof pitch

Executed very modern

Exposed concrete on the terrace in all directions,

Those seem to be planting elements? We had similar ones in the ’78 row house made of exposed concrete. Ours even contained asbestos…

and stairs, huge (concrete) paved driveway, retaining walls made of unplastered concrete…

Very contemporary for the time! And still.

huge transparent corrugated roof over the terrace,

Yes, I would also call that a building sin, but something you could just tear down and reroof.

exposed aggregate concrete slabs

Also exposed aggregate concrete is back ;)
However, those are actually things one overlooks, because they can be replaced. Just like paneling and bathroom renovation.
But as said before: for some, the house is a gem – although I don’t like hallways, this hallway has a really great aura, if you can see it in the photo. I would take the house gladly, and certainly not because of a pool, which I never have on my list.

Oops, yes.., it is and will never be your house.

Thanks for your opinion, well, I might have come across a bit too negative. I think a lot about the house is great and it really has potential. The ugly aspects can mostly be changed with small interventions. Exposed concrete in anthracite, for example, I find chic; in light gray it becomes a concrete wasteland. I have no fundamental problem with the floor plan, I just worry because it’s not mainstream, just as you wrote.

Hopefully the planter boxes don’t contain asbestos... I would definitely want to dispose of them during the renovation.

I have another question about financing: How detailed does a renovation offer have to be to be sufficient for the bank? And what documents about the existing condition must I present so that nothing goes wrong?

Is it even worth hiring an expert with my budget for renovations?

I joined a builders' association. There, an hour of inspection and appraisal costs €350 plus an annual fee of €50 (I think). Considering your total costs, I think it is a worthwhile investment, unless you are well versed.