16th-century timber-frame cottage - to buy or not to buy?

[Crumblebumble]

We are considering purchasing a 16th-century timber-frame cottage with brick infill. It is gorgeous, but it is intimidatingly old and has an oil-powered heating system and foul drainage via septic tank. The house looks in reasonably good condition and is fully renovated, but I wondered if people typically had an issue securing a mortgage on such properties, or issues selling.

 

[Kearn]

A ‘fully renovated’ old building is a phrase that puts the fear of god into me. But, a ‘fully renovated’ 500+ yo timber frame is the start of a very probably financial nightmare…

There’s a chance, someone has done a proper, educated conservation, repair, restoration over many years of owning and sinking everything they have into the home as a labour of love. But, if it’s a recent purchase and flip, then run a mile.

Any pics/links?

Oil heating and a septic tank are very far from the biggest potential areas of concern.

Most high street lenders will be wary of old buildings, especially those they term as single skin, and just say no. Those who will lend (Santander was know to be willing) will put conditions on the funds dependent on a timber and damp survey from the PCA. This is where the scam begins. Have a search of this forum for PCA or similar to get a steer.

Selling an old home limits you to a rather niche target set of genuine buyers, and lots of folks who have no idea and run scared very quickly after eating lots of time and energy.

Timber frames are beautiful, and I have a thing for them, but they are not for the faint hearted or those on a tight budget for the house maintenance and repairs. Eyes very much open….
There are very few capable historic surveyors out there who are worth their rates, lesser still those who can understand a frame sensibly.

I had to say it, but with an old house looks can often be very deceiving, especially when it comes to timber.

 

[TudorCottage]

We purchased this 16th century timber framed cottage 4 years ago and shared exactly the same concerns as yourselves.

4 years have passed and we haven’t regretted it once.

Credit to the previous owners who looked after it in a largely sympathetic manner.

A full structural survey by a surveyor with historical knowledge was duly undertaken which showed a couple of the timber frames needed some minor work to be carried out, a trader with the relevant skills was hired and these were rectified.

I spent many hours researching this forum and other sources for guidance which has proved invaluable.
I followed my nose to a certain extent as there wasn’t a hint of a smell of damp, mould or mildew on the three occasions we visited this place before purchase.

One concern after 3 bouts of heavy rain in 2024 was the paths around the cottage not shedding the water quickly enough. I dug all around the cottage, laid new French drains and some new ‘ordinary’ drains, all leading to a large soak away, replaced all the old silted shingle with new and we’ve had no issues since.

Sounds daunting but really wasn’t and materials only, means it didn’t break the bank. I’ve found it much easier working on this place than our previous 1960’s abode. And I wouldn’t win any DIY’er of the year awards.

Even with tired timbers, these places with a brick infill are much stronger than you think and have stood the test of time for over 500 years. What could possibly go wrong in our relatively short spell of custody

One thing to avoid, those old Peter Ward You Tube videos, there enough to put you off timber framed cottages for life.

Go for it, you only I’ve once

 

[larry]

I would only add that having bought a house that's is only 100 and not 500 years old, I walked into it very uninformed. It had equally been "fully renovated". I've spent the last several years peeling back all of those renovations and finding a catalogue of horrors. For fully renovated the seller meant "covered up". So, is there lime plaster and breathable paints everywhere or plasterboard and Dulux? Damp proof injection holes? Rotten timber floors from blocked up ventilation?
I still wouldn't have made a different decision knowing what I know now, but I daresay the scale of potential difficulty that could be covered up and done badly is way above what I've experienced for a house that old....

 

[Tuffa]

Hi,

I bought a C17 house as part of a terrace with timber frame on top floor in 2013. I had mortgage offers from Lloyds and Yorkshire BS; I didn’t try anyone else. With regards to selling, I think these are best sold by agents that specifically deal with character properties. They should be better placed to present it in a suitable manner (in advertising), deal with type-specific questions, and provide hand-holding to potential buyers. My observation locally is that most buyers are retired and don’t need a mortgage.

Regarding the septic tank, assure yourself that it is ‘compliant’ as you can quickly lose 10k putting in a sewage treatment plant (google ‘sewage binding rules’).

It sounds as though the property is listed. I found that this means almost all online enquiries for insurance result in the need to make a phone call, and none of the comparison web sites I tried could provide quotes for a listed property. So, that’s a pain. However I have not had to do this for a few years, so maybe this has changed.

My advice to anyone buying *any* type of property is to visit it with someone who has *first* hand experience of the type: either as owner or builder.

If you’re curious about the quality and extent of the renovation then ask to see some photo’s. It’s almost inconceivable that before and after photo’s don’t exist these days!

Good luck!

 

[Cubist]

I have never understood the reticence of some people to even entertain the idea of buying a timber framed property. To my mind such reluctance is entirely without (forgive the pun) real foundation. When asked, most respondents will call out the fire risk as being somehow greater, or any such as being far more disastrous. After this argument they sometimes then turn to the suggestion that bricks and stone are stronger and more durable. This latter proposition, is patent nonsense! Take a hand hammer to a brick or stone, alone or in a wall, and you can destroy it within minutes. Take the same hammer to an oak beam and the wielder will expire long before the beam. Beyond these, most pundits can offer no further argument of any real substance.

In truth, in my opinion, there is virtually no difference between the level of risk and the potential for damage arising to a timber frame house and any other construction - except perhaps a reinforced concrete fortress. In fact there are some key and critical advantages offered by these buildings - and some uniquely associated with older examples that even outweigh those of traditional brick and mortar builds.

With a timber frame structure you can see, feel and touch its very skeleton - its bones - and can easily determine if the structure is sound. Their ‘life scars’, if not covered in paint, are obvious. Misplaced blows of an adze, old water stains on the interior faces, saw blade stutters and even the exit holes of long dead woodworm are all on show to tell you something of the timbers history. The infill panels used to flesh out the body have a very clear and limited set of non-structural functions the behaviour and performance of which are also easily determined and each panel is entirely independent of all the others - the failure and fall of one seldom directly affects the others. Similarly the timbers. If any one or more were to fail these can be repaired or even replaced in situ.

From a purely structural point of view a timber frame house can therefore be better able to resist and recover from almost any physical insult than a brick and mortar property.

NOW! Right now, is the ideal time to examine and assess a timber frame house.

It's been cold, wet and miserable outdoors for weeks. The surrounding ground around the house will still be sodden, as will, in large, the earth the house covers. The timbers and masonry infill panels and the roof have been battered with snow, rain and wind - they will be wet and so will the foundation of the structure whether that be brick, stone or rubble. And to this you can add the fact that the gardens will have been flattened and be far from their best in terms of appearance and ability to 'hide' structural elements of the building and any topographical issues with terrain.

In these conditions the house and grounds are at their lowest possible ebb which can only help to at least 'grey' that Rose Coloured Tint to your glasses and to calm some of your more ambitious and adventurous inclinations and urges. Though, you do need to go into this with your eyes wide open and with your Nikes laced up ready to run like hell.

No one but you and your partner can decide whether the Risk and Reward equation works for you. The best that anyone here can offer is some friendly and, sometimes perhaps unwelcome, knowledge. With that in mind I would suggest you go back to view the house again after you have armed yourself with some/all of the following:-

1. Enemy Number One for any timber frame house is; Water - from any source.
   1. That includes rainwater from outdoors, spills and leaks indoors, your heating and ventilation systems, your cooking, cleaning, laundry and bathing needs and not forgetting your bodily functions.
2. Enemy Number Two is; Paint and Hard Finishesof any kind - including some/most wall paints over plaster or render.
   1. Paint and other hard finishes such as varnishes outdoors and/or indoors should be regarded as big red flags.
   2. These can trap water in the timbers to allow them to rot and decay and also to attract wood-munching pests.
   3. Much closer and sometimes invasive examination of coated timbers is vital to ensure their condition.
3. Enemy Number Three is; Cement mortars and gypsum plasters.
   1. Whilst these are not absolutely impermeable they too can trap moisture in walls to then induce a host of problems.
   2. The structure needs to breathe and needs as much help as we can give it to do so efficiently.
4. Enemy Number Four is; the timber frame itself.
   1. It must be remembered that the wood is a fluid transport system used while the tree is growing.
   2. That transport system does not stop working after the tree is felled and the wood shaped to produce any product however small or massive.
   3. Any water finding its way into the wood of a timber frame structure will, aided by gravity and/or capillary action, usually find a way either to escape or, worst of all, remain trapped within the lowest sections it can reach.
   4. The various joints used to connect the timbers to form the frame of the structure provide branch lines which in essence bears some semblance to a river delta or a drain system. These aid the wider spread of water contamination to neighbouring timbers and pose a considerable risk to the joints connecting elements.
   5. 3 and 4 above explains why the cill beams are most prone to water induced rot and decay.

Regarding buying and selling. Most lenders don’t give a damn about the condition of the house. Their only concern is whether they can recoup all you might owe should you default. That said though they may insist on a larger deposit than you may expect - shop around. I’ve never sold a timber frame house….yet, but they often come available in my part of the world and seldom remain ‘on the shelf’ for very long.

 

[jamest]

It's only the English who worry about timber framed houses. Everywhere else a lot, often a majority, of houses are still built with timber frames and not even in hardwood - the United States, Australia, Scotland, Norway, Germany to name a few- and in none of these places do lenders call this 'non-standard' construction, because it isn't. Scotland is particularly weird because it's often the same lenders who are OK with it in Scotland, but raise issues in England. Baffling!

 

[Kearn]

The issue is far from the timber framing, an ancient oak frame from proper slow grown native forests is largely bomb proof - caveated by the skills of the initial carpenters of course and historic maintenance, particularly shedding water.

The insertion of heavy brick infill panels is never great, it adds significant load that the frame was never designed to carry, and is often bedded/pointed now in S&C trapping water against the timber. However, these brick panels over time can themself become structural as they take up some of the slack in the frame weaknesses.

The primary issue with timber frames, is what has been done to them since the 1960s or so… the same piece of oak that has been happily bracing the elements for 500 years, then gets encased in a few inches of impervious cement render, with cracks, and water can drip in and sit endlessly, then turns to dust in the next 50.

A very real example, the tie beam on the weathered elevation of our frame, photographed in 1981 exposed and in reasonably intact shape. Compared to the damage below after a few decades of being trapped in a wet soggy jacket of 4” of cement render.



When it comes to timber, you can never fully asses the true condition unless you can get to all 4 faces.

So, yes there should be very wise caution applied to purchasing one, especially if much of it has been subjected to modern materials inside and out. That certainly doesn’t mean don’t buy one, and I would never live in anything else, but do make sure you have the right council when surveying and a very healthy contingency fund for repairs.

It’s sadly very rare to find examples that haven’t been modernised and meddled with to the point of concealed damage.