April 2015
Some go to extreme lengths to discredit condo living.
Discouraging seniors from considering a condo lifestyle that allows them to live more economically and with greater ease without good reason is a disservice.
The Globe and Mail published a blog from a single woman who regrets her decision to downsize to a condo. She is approaching 60 and owned a 3,000 square foot home but only used the kitchen, bedroom and study. She lived on her own with no dependents.
She was initially sold on condo living because it made financial sense. The benefits to her included being mortgage-free, lower utility bills and no lawn maintenance. She felt that the monthly condo fee was preferable to worrying about repairs.
So she sold her house, moved to a condo, got everything she wanted and regretted her decision. She disliked condo living, said it was a “failed experiment” and identified five reasons why it was a mistake.
- She had no plan for how to invest the money. She regretted leaving her 3,000 square foot house which was mostly unused. Her instinct to keep the house as an investment in anticipation that its value would continue to increase is a costly and risky indulgence few can afford.
- Her belief that the condo market is risky is valid for all forms of home ownership. Her statement that condos take longer to sell and don’t appreciate as much as detached and semi-detached houses is unsubstantiated opinion inconsistent with reported sales information.
- Condo fees will increase. That is obvious and beyond dispute. So does the cost of utilities, repairs, food and everything else associated with living. Living in a condo does not make one immune to increases in the cost of living.
- Although living alone, she felt that a condo did not provide room for family and friends and was not comfortable with entertaining in the party room. After selling a 3,000 square foot house, purchasing a sufficiently large condo for entertaining should not have been a problem.
- Many see moving to a condo as a way to downsize and eliminate unneeded items. In this case, the writer regretted not having space to store “30 years of clutter” and chose not to purchase a storage locker.
The Globe and Mail article was a weak effort at discouraging retirees from considering what more are recognizing to be an improved, less costly, enjoyable and less demanding lifestyle.
