Sorry if this is not the best place for this post; I know that irritates some people.
We're farmers and almost 5 years ago we bought a 40 with cropland and the farmhouse/buildings. The house, which we had been previously renting, is nothing special to look at. It was built in 1916 and I JUST found a baseboard in the garage with the Sears shipping label on it to confirm the rumor that it was a sears house. However, it has had an addition put on among other ugly things inside and we won't ever pursue getting it back to its original self. In my opinion the house is well built, sturdy, level, etc. The layout, lighting, drop ceilings, paneling and the like suck. We have gone back and forth for years as to whether we should remodel or build new. Everybody always gives us the same old line about how we'll spend so much money and still have an old house (so what? old = inferior?). But the problem is we're still PAYING for this house. The fair market value as well as the value we put on the house when we agreed on the price was around $70,000. And we would have the expense of getting rid of it! It had a new roof in about 2004. The basement is low and I think we'd want the house raised. It would almost have to be gutted to get a floorplan that would work for our family.
Should I get estimates for the work we'd want done and compare to how much it would cost to get rid of the old house and build new? Since you're tearing down (or whatever) the old house don't you kind of just add that value onto the price of your new house and consider it money down the tubes? Is this a no-brainer one way or the other? Has anyone been in this situation? I think hubby would just as soon build new. I have gone back and forth a million times about what to do. Either way it is a daunting task.