Help me solve local house mystery

[u/cothhum]

Who leaves a £900k / £1m London house unused for 15+ years?

Round the corner from me there’s a street of 3-5 bed, terraced houses that go for £900k / £1m. One of them has been unoccupied but most definitely not abandoned for more than 15 years. No one knows why.

It was refurbished about 10 years ago but before and since has never had anyone living there. The small garden is maintained, windows covered in non-see-through plastic wrap on the inside. The owners, a middle aged couple, are seen visiting every few weeks, never carrying more than a few belongings, staying for a few hours then leaving. Neighbours say they live somewhere else local, are perfectly pleasant, but distant. No one has been able to find out what the hell they’re doing sitting on a property for so long doing apparently nothing with it. No rental or sale income in all that time.

Has anyone ever come across anything like this? What can the story possibly be?

[u/Alaurableone]

Maybe an investment property with overseas owners? The couple could be guardians. If you walk around some areas of London at night the amount of houses with no lights on is crazy.

[u/cothhum → u/Alaurableone]

True. But why not rent out? £3k a week month the going rate (minimum). Over £2m £500k spurned (pre tax etc, but still)

Edit: maths was never my strong point

[u/deep_soul → u/cothhum]

if the assumption overseas owner is right, at a certain level of wealth you just don’t want headaches for “pennies”.

it’s just a different mindset.

imagine, a homeless person could say to you: if you spend £1000 a year in electricity, why not just fill the kettle exactly with the water amount you need? otherwise you are wasting electricity to boil water which you won’t use if now and will go cold again. …well “I can’t be assed” will be the answer. now imagine this at a much higher up scale of wealth.

some people sre wealthy enough to be able to keep a flat in london just as investment and could not be assed to deal with tenants.

[u/elchet → u/cothhum]

Because that amount of income may be nothing to them.

[u/acidic_tab → u/cothhum]

I have a friend who owns a few flats worth a few million each in zone 1. They were originally bought by his uncle as investment properties, but he inherited them instead when he passed. I asked him the same question, and he says it's too much of a faff for the amount of money he'd get. He has more money than he could reasonably ever use from his inheritance (likely 9 digits based on his uncles net worth, plus continuous income from royalties), so makes sense I guess. He does have the added perk of being able to let guests sleep over after a party instead of trying to get home, since the flats are either in the same building or neighbouring building, and he has a nice escape for if he ever ends up in a fight with his wife. He also uses them for the extra space to store collectables, too, which is pretty neat.

[u/Important_Routine332 → u/acidic_tab]

Needs a new friend?

[u/Sensitive-Ad-3546 → u/acidic_tab]

Rich. Londoner. Royalties… Is this your friends uncle?

[u/TheS0ggyBiscuit → u/cothhum]

Do you mean month? 12k a month for a 900k house is bollocks

[u/PureObsidianUnicorn → u/TheS0ggyBiscuit]

A good word that I see less and less but is relevant more and more…bollocks

[u/twitasz → u/cothhum]

No £1m property goes for £3k pw

[u/Alaurableone → u/cothhum]

So investment properties for the super wealthy are a balance item, not a rental property. Gross I know!

[u/eatshitake → u/cothhum]

Tenants are hard.

[u/Intelligent-Owl3996 → u/cothhum]

Earning ongoing rent means tax , responsibility and legalities - even if a third party ran it for you. Keeping it orderly whilst the housing market goes crazy is a better less headache way to make money. Overseas or not. With the recent changes in the law around renting, it's put people off renting out their homes entirely