To what extent do you consider living in old age when building?

So for me, the benefit of an owner-occupied (paid-off) property in old age is that I no longer have to pay rent and therefore have more pension left. Because what I don't pay is pretty much the only thing where the state can't extend its hand and demand taxes for it.

Sure, you can sell a big place and buy something smaller, even then you still have no rental costs (the costs of buying and selling real estate should be covered by downsizing the living space, I assume). But then I still have the problem that in old age I am supposed to leave my familiar (and beloved) surroundings, possibly because I moved from the countryside back to the city for better access to doctors, shopping, etc., losing my social environment completely, and that many people simply are no longer as mobile in old age and just don’t want that. That is emotional but understandable. And I find that legitimate. To be honest, I couldn’t care less if my house is possibly too big for me in old age. Then it just is. I can balance out the remoteness (which I am seeking now, I LOVE my little village, I want to live there and I can’t imagine ever living in a noisy city again) by hiring a cleaning help (we already have that, though mainly because we don’t want to waste our limited free time on cleaning), a care service etc. (then it makes sense again to consider whether to plan so that part of the house can possibly be converted into a granny flat or at least a separate living unit, if you’re thinking about getting a care service into the house) or even a delivery service for groceries (or just nice neighbors who get you something; in the village you still have intensive social contacts with the neighbors).

These are all good arguments, but you forget the emotional level. And that becomes increasingly important with age. People are reluctant to part with what is familiar.

We have the advantage that we don’t have to build for children, we build for the two of us, no more children will come (I am 49, that topic is settled). Maintenance costs? Honestly: if they drag me out of that house, the place behind me can fall apart and I assume that a solidly built house can stand well and easily for 40 years without major maintenance measures (I see that with my parents’ house: built in 1974, since then the heating system has been replaced once, now windows are gradually being renewed because the old wooden windows are leaking at least on the weather-exposed side, roof tiles have been sealed so that not so much moss grows on them, that’s all; everything else were rather conversion measures because someone wanted something different). And if I spend my last years in a house that has some renovation needs, then I honestly don’t really care. You can just ride that out.

If I or my partner should become a care case, well, then it might be that the welfare sells off the house, but honestly: even if I should survive the amount of money that then results, in Germany I won’t be dumped from the nursing home under the next bridge. And I’m not really worried about that now. Who knows if I will even experience it...
We’re actually thinking about a different arrangement, where my brother becomes the owner and we get a right of residence, but that has entirely different reasons (my brother’s children are supposed to inherit).

I’m not afraid that the property will lose value in our area (the outskirts of Munich). The value of the land alone should cover that.

Ergo: I’m building myself a nice house now, making sure that I can still use the house with possibly some limitations that may come with age (but also through accidents and illness, and who always plans all that nicely?) and my plan is, totally out of step with the times, to grow old in this house and, as I said, to be carried out feet first. Will it work? No idea…
But honestly: only having to cover the ancillary costs with the pension, that is already one motivation for us to build this house and to have the financing paid off before retirement (if it’s earlier, even better!).

Basically, everyone can do/calculate as they please - from a professional perspective, I am only outlining some fundamental aspects that one can certainly consider in view of current events and social developments.

However, there is some quiet doubt in certain areas about the still widely anchored idea of "Grandma's little house for old-age provision" (an individual assessment can of course not replace such a rough and generalizing representation and is not intended to do so).

For most users of this forum, there is still enough time to become clear about alternatives - for some older owners of property in such locations, however, the train has irretrievably left the station. And you don't have to follow suit with your eyes wide open.

Best regards Dirk Grafe

Most users probably still see it as retirement provision - for themselves. In our development area, by the way, exclusively everyone - but probably also logical, as there is hardly any infrastructure, village -> dead. At least that's the (cheeky) thinking of some clever minds. We will see what it looks like in 30 years... I am an advocate that the urban exodus (in stable areas) will subside.

But they are probably all limited in their stupid view ;)

The move away from rural areas has increased significantly again in the last 2-3 years, with truly rural areas meant by that. The commuter belt around large cities is growing instead. At my workplace, about 15-20 km from the city center of the major urban center, there is a lot of construction going on. A few years ago, that was still considered 'too far out.' Nothing more needs to be said about the Berlin commuter belt.

We live about 60km away from Munich. A few years ago, that was still the middle of nowhere, now it counts as the mentioned [Speckgürtel] (real estate, if still available at all, has become extremely expensive, as have plots of land).

Basically, anyone can do/calculate however they want – from a professional point of view, I am only presenting some fundamental aspects that one can certainly consider in light of current events and social developments.

However, there is some slight doubt regarding the still widely anchored idea of "grandma’s little house for retirement" in certain areas (an individual assessment can of course not replace such a coarse and generalizing representation and is not meant to).

For most users of this forum, there is still enough time to become clear about alternatives – for some older owners of a property in such locations, however, the train has irretrievably left the station. And you don’t have to follow that with open eyes.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

You can continue to represent this position to exhaustion.
In a forum full of potential builders, current builders, and those who have just moved into a house, you naturally have poor odds with that. Whether it is accurate, objective, subjective, or something else.

It’s like the discussion about whether owning a home is financially worthwhile or not. It simply leads nowhere.