Any pitfalls of buying homes that are 100+ years old?

Question

In my area (New England), the majority of houses, (multi families in particular) are over 100 years old. If I am planning on buying and holding long term, what are some of the pitfalls of buying these extremely old homes and is it still worthwhile to invest in them?

Steve Babiak · Answer

A thorough rehab plan to update the ancient systems should be considered. The electrical system in these older properties could be composed of 60 amp service, fuse boxes, knob and tube, ungrounded wiring, no GFCI, no AFCI, no smoke alarms, no CO alarms. The plumbing could have lead supply lines and galvanized supply lines, and the waste lines could be clay, "Orangeburg" (Black coal-tar impregnated fiber piping), and even cast iron waste can develop cracks especially if the lines go unused for long periods. You might also find gas lines that run throughout the house used long ago to serve lighting fixtures. Lead paint and asbestos are also part of the mix of materials. And the asbestos can be found in things you might never expect, like drywall and drywall compounds, and floor tile and the floor tile adhesives. And the type of framing might be something unfamiliar, such as balloon framing. And insulation to reduce energy consumption might as well be non-existent in some of these.

Keep in mind that bathrooms would be an add on in most of these. And ceiling clearances can be more suitable for short people. Doorway openings can be very narrow (I have one where tenant could not get his big bulky sofa in, and where I had to remove the door AND door stop wood to user barely squeeze in a washer and dryer). Floors can be out of level. Staircases can be these odd spiral sorts of things that make moving furniture a challenge.

Heating systems might be gravity based (not forced air or no circulator if a boiler). Radiators can leak or crack, and they can be hard to find if you want to match what is there, and very heavy to deal with if more than a few feet in length. Fuel being used for heating might not be what you'd prefer.

As thorough as that seems, I probably missed some things.

Mike Hurney · Answer

@Vincent Z. Welcome.

Go in the basement for 10 minutes. If you can't see many pitfalls, go back in the basement for 10 minutes. If you....

Jeff S. · Answer

@Vincent Z. it has more to do with the area than the age. When considering all the weaknesses @Steve Babiak mentioned it matters if the home is worth 25k or 250k and how much is already done. Low cost/value areas are tough to deal with older stock but if the land value is high there is always potential. I have a 1910 duplex that has been great; original water lines shared causing me a potential large expense; bought in 1991 and appreciation has been strong; younger folks love the architecture and hardwoods (1.5 inch wide planks are cool) with over a 100 Craigslist hits when using pics of hardwood and pillars.

The thing is, the best land has been used by these older buildings. With lots in close-in Portland  (tear downs) going for over 200k having a 250-300k place is a good bet IMO. Thinking about dropping earthquake since so much value in the land.

Joel Owens · Answer

Look up Ann Bellamy on here.

Where you are at is tenant friendly and you have a 100 year old house. The good news is usually they were built to last as far as the bones. The bad news is there is a ton of things with the vintage that can get very expensive to fix and take away your cash flow for years.

Verna M. · Answer

I restored a 1921 craftsman house almost back to original condition after it had been a rental for 20 years.   I think I ran into every single thing on Steve's list and then some.    This was a personal residence/labor of love thing, so different situation,  but it was a huge learning experience.  I replaced all the plumbing, electrical, roof and sewer.  Did a full gut remodel of the bathroom and a minor kitchen remodel. No HVAC, just a wall furnace as Im in California :)

I also had a  problem because  the home was built by hand and nothing was 'standard sized' or at least not todays standard.  Every single window and door was odd sized. There was just no going to the depot and buying the stock whatever because it would never work.    The  bathroom was very small and most of todays modern fixtures were TOO BIG!  The first  sink and toilet I brought home  were almost touching and that wouldn't pass code with the city.

Of course these were my issues,  and there were 100s more,  but it's  the kind of things that crop up with old houses that you would  never even think of.  On the plus side, the house was 100% built with redwood and had ZERO termite damage.

That said,  I'd do it all over again as a flip  or another personal home but I don't think I'd put a renter in one.  If it was not fixed Id be worried about them getting hurt or causing more damage.  If it in good shape, I'd probably worry someone would destroy it and repairs are so costly.

Oh and insurance.  Every year when my policy was up for renewal they found SOMETHING to harass me over. Usually it was the city owned oak tree I was not legally allowed to trim.

Jeff S. · Answer

@Mike Hurney so true. Water leaks and octopus furnaces wrapped in asbestos. Add on baths with questionable foundations and dry rot.

Tarik Larue · Answer

In my area homes before 1950 have lead and/ or asbestos. Your plumbing may be corroded and need replacing. The electric needs to be replaced or upgraded for higher usage. The roof needs inspecting. Are the water heater and furnace still in good shape. Probably needs AC and heating installed. Good luck.

Any pitfalls of buying homes that are 100+ years old?

Most Popular Reply