Living area calculation incorrect - House purchase

Purchase of an existing property (single-family house from 1976)

Question: What actually needs to be available for the purchase process? Are there disadvantages or even advantages due to the old, now incorrect living space calculation?

Bought as seen. The owner made a small mistake: it would have been better if he had spoken of 130 sqm of living space plus a finished basement.

However, the bank checks.

Not always, but here there is a wide range...

To make the basement rooms an approved living space, financial expense is necessary.

But you don’t have to. Enjoy the rooms as they are. You liked them, right?!
I would only worry if I had "recreation rooms" downstairs where children or other family members (including myself) would be in an unpredictable danger, e.g., in case of a house fire.

Personally, I would have a problem advertising the house as having 200 sqm of living space, because factually that is not correct. If we want to rent the entire house in the future, we couldn’t charge rent for 200 sqm, but only for 130 sqm.

But you don’t have to. Advertise as I wrote above, how the owner should have advertised.

I would simply tell the owner that it is not as he thinks, what a space miracle he has with the house. He certainly oriented himself on 200 sqm. Possibly you have a small price lever there, but I wouldn’t rely on it.

Report back!

Are there disadvantages because the house officially only has 120 sqm of living space according to the documents?

Your bank might see it differently when determining the value and calculate the loan-to-value ratio less favorably for you.

Otherwise, as others say, the value of the place is what you and other interested parties are willing to pay for it.