Grand Designs home branded ‘saddest ever’ still unsold after 12 years despite huge price cut

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/grand-designs-home-saddest-ever-unsold-price-cut-b2539090.html

by insomnimax_99

24 comments

  2. Newspapers cash cow. Theyve written the exact same article twice a year for 12 years now, just changing the years and price

  3. I’d like to live near the coast, just not **that** near the coast! Slip over one day, fall off cliff.

    Spectacular views though, I’m sure. I only vaguely recall the TV episode.

  4. “Being sold on behalf of the receivers”.

    So the guy went bust? Wonder what he’s up to now. I remember he was a producer for the Euphoria line of compilation albums.

  5. This episode _really_ wound me up. The guy had a perfectly serviceable house on this plot already which his kids were absolutely in love with. Instead of getting an extension, he decided to project-manage himself into bankruptcy over the course of a decade on a vanity project. His wife and kids left him, and he was forced to sell up by the end of the episode.

  7. Its a bit of an eyesore, looks like a coast guard lookout. for 5.2M you could get something a lot nicer in a similar position.

  8. wasn’t it left open to the elements and unglazed for a good length of time. i remember thinking that even if they did get the windows in and sealed up i would be worried about any lasting damage from the exposure

  9. Its not too bad. but who would want to spend that kind of money on a house that looks like it will be in the sea before you can pass it down to your kids?!?

  10. That article with the video doesn’t make sense, I don’t think it’s correct

  11. I regularly window shop for coastal properties on Rightmove and have seen this one several times. I always thought it was hideous.

  12. £5.5 million is more like it. No one with £10 million to spend plus fitout costs was going to want to live right beside the coastal path, with the main road right there.

    Best result now is it gets turned into a boutique hotel or venue of some sort. I used to think the owner was just an idiot, but I feel sorry for him now.

  13. That cliff is going to erode. Even if the foundations hold, you’re basically going to be living in a house on rusty stilts. Not a great aesthetic, unless you’re living in a jungle treehouse.

  14. Poor house. I doubt it’ll ever be lived in.

    Even if it was completed as originally intended it would struggle to make £5m in that location. North Devon is nice enough but Woolacombe isn’t Rock or St Ives. There aren’t a lot of billionaires looking to holiday surrounded by static caravans and penny arcades.

    What they’re trying to sell is little more than a shell. It has no heating, no bathrooms, no kitchen, let alone the kind of high end features and finishes that the kind of high net worth buyer they’re after would want. The ugly basic glazing that they’ve slapped in to make it ‘watertight’ would have to be ripped out and replaced.

    Even the shell has some big question marks over it. It was built piecemeal, with numerous compromises made to reduce costs, and then sat open to the elements for five years in a location that couldn’t be closer to the sea. The concrete would have soaked up a lot of saltwater in that time, never mind all the steels. The layout and the use of space can be described as unusual at best and the look isn’t to everyone’s taste.

    I can’t imagine anyone who would lend against a partially completed property under the circumstances, so you’re left looking for someone who has £6-7m to blow on a house that would only be worth £4.5m when finished and may never be mortgageable. That’s an automatic ‘no’ from even the super-rich, who will invariably want to take out an interest-only mortgage on it to free up investment capital.

    I’d say the site is worth £2m if they demolish the house for you, or £1.25m to £1.5m if you have to demolish it yourself.

  15. Those thick bezels on the windows may well be required but they’re awful!

  16. I hate these home ownership shows, who are they made for?

  17. Maybe this will end up on Omaze, or one one of those other win a massive house competitions..

  18. I think it’s one of the usual scenarios where someone basically became successful because they were lucky , but then assumed they were a super genius …… and then found out they weren’t

  19. Saddest episode was the boat house that was never completed and lost it’s mooring to float down the Thames estuary. They don’t even show it on TV anymore it’s so depressing. Never bothered with a follow up either

  20. I love that fact that probably half of us knew which house it was from the title alone – despite never watching the episode.

    Although if someone has a link…..

  21. I grew up in the 90s watching Gran Designs and Location Location Location. It was entertaining and even aspirational back then but 20yrs later when you’re almost middle aged and possibly still living at home its hard to feel any sympathy for these rich boomers who had every financial privilege and opportunity and still allowed their egos to blow it.

  22. I know a few people that have mulled over buying the place on the principle that they hate looking at it so much. I wish I had that kind of eff you money.

  23. What I don’t understand is the house he had was already a nice size, could have made it a little bigger and kept all the grounds and been mortgage free relatively easy by the sounds of his situation at the start. It was a stunning location at the beginning.

    Could have spent more just pimping the inside, as the original house he had there was very cookie cutter and boring. Would have cost next to nothing in comparison. I never understood why people choose to debt themselves to the eyeballs to live in huge massive properties youll never use all of. Just seems such a waste of space.

    I would rather be mortgage free, have a really super beautiful little cottage/bungalow that’s super pimped out, and have lots of grounds for animals and freedom and stuff 🤷‍♂️

  24. What I don’t understand is the house he had was already a nice size, could have made it a little bigger and kept all the grounds and been mortgage free relatively easy by the sounds of his situation at the start. It was a stunning location at the beginning.

    Could have spent more just pimping the inside, as the original house he had there was very cookie cutter and boring. Would have cost next to nothing in comparison. I never understood why people choose to debt themselves to the eyeballs to live in huge massive properties youll never use all of. Just seems such a waste of space.

    I would rather be mortgage free, have a really super beautiful little cottage/bungalow that’s super pimped out, and have lots of grounds for animals and freedom and stuff 🤷‍♂️

Leave a Reply