House from 1970 - Purchase advice/assessment

You did not understand my post.
It is also not about "definitely buying" or "stay away"

It does not have to be this house.

I am referring here to this house, that you see it as more inferior than it is.
There is no view for the positive anymore.

The dog completely scratched the floors

That does not matter at all to a parquet floor. In theory, you can sand and reseal it yourself as a DIY job.

in the closer environment, the "better" eyes would have,

Not better, but different. To set a different focus.

Asbestos in the facade?!

Well, from the 70s and then this facade cladding? You can certainly suspect asbestos.

Well, from the 70s and then this facade cladding? Asbestos can definitely be suspected.

How can I turn the suspicion into certainty? Where do I have to take a sample that I can send in?

You did not understand my post. It's not about "definitely buying" or "hands off" either. I am referring here to this house, that you see it as more inferior than it is. There is no longer any view for the positive.

Hmm, I was positive until the posts here and until I realized that the effort is much greater than expected. The house has potential. You can rent out part of it later, the basement is big enough to work sometimes. The location is good, quiet and close to the forest. The plot with 300 sqm is not too big to be tied to the garden, but big enough to play with the son. But the apparently accumulating costs dampen that massively.

How can I turn suspicion into certainty? Where do I need to take a sample that I can send in?

You don’t need to send it in. If it’s not asbestos, there will be nothing “worse” here. And if it is asbestos, simply put, it’s “unproblematic as long as you leave it alone,” i.e., you have to have it examined before you work on it or have it properly disposed of.

Hmm, I was optimistic until the posts here

... with those from Holzhaus61 and artibi, by the way, I agree ...

and until it became clear to me that the effort is much greater than expected. The house has potential. You can rent out part of it later, the basement is large enough to work sometimes. The location is good, quiet, and close to the forest.

... and I especially assume that the (not least financial) effort is great until the house stands like a shell from its time.

Our budget is just over €850,000, but the less/shorter double burden the better.

A budget that includes borrowed money has no absolute limit: the bank’s willingness to lend very much depends on how it assesses the value of the property as collateral for the financing. Here I see too high a part of the purchase price wish invested in parts that need to be demolished, and thus “lost.” For the collateral, this means that these “values” need to be replenished (with other money) and/or the financing conditions shift significantly. Specifically, this means for you the question whether you can bear correspondingly more painful conditions or can manage with 650k.

You can rent out a part later

Do you want strangers on your property all the time? And does the floor plan really allow for two decent living units? We once looked at a house where the seller thought the upstairs could be rented out separately. It could work as a separate living unit, but the ground floor was then a bit small and far too dark.

the basement is big enough to work sometimes

Do you have heating and enough daylight there? Potential is nice and all, but even better is a house that meets your needs. If you want to rent out, buy a condominium or a proper multi-family house.

The house has potential. You can rent out a part later, the basement is big enough to work in sometimes. The location is good, quiet and close to the forest.
the with 300 sqm is not too big to be tied down to the garden, but big enough to play with your son.

… then I come back to this question again

I am always surprised when older properties are put up for discussion here, that when I search on portals in the mentioned town with a radius of 2 or 5 km, I find properties of comparable size, but newly built projects or similar for similar or usually lower prices, especially compared to an additional renovation.

No idea if one or the other is located in your preferred residential area by the forest, but do you have a dog or ambitions for the forest (besides just going for a walk)?
As mentioned above; you don’t have to buy the quantity that is in worse condition, if there is quality that may be smaller but easily affordable, basically the price-performance winner.
Maybe you’re getting entangled, maybe you choose wisely.
Could it be that a good house scores worse with you because it is smaller in comparison?! Then suddenly the roof terrace is tempting, even though there is no real need for it, since there is a garden?
Please don’t take this as me blaming you. I also searched for two years back then, but without the internet and only with ads in a small local paper. But back then you knew, if only 2-3 options were available in a month, you can’t have everything, nor can you easily move your existing life 10 km further with the moving van. You won’t have the one thing anymore, but the new floor plan sparks curiosity for change, even if there are tight spots. The courage or necessity to buy a used property is also the path to an exciting compromise that you gladly accept, because new is often boring.

As someone unfamiliar with the location, I took another look at your preferred residential area, but only roughly.
Affordable including renovation or livable without renovation:

[ATTACH alt="IMG_0836.jpeg"]84144[/ATTACH][ATTACH alt="IMG_0835.jpeg"]84145[/ATTACH][ATTACH alt="IMG_0834.jpeg"]84146[/ATTACH]
Three different houses with potential:
€380,000 with charm, old, but enough money to renovate
€620,000 like new, solid and valuable
€650,000 symbiosis of both (my personal favorite… I’m really in love)