148 Waterloo Walk, Washington, Tyne and Wear, NE37 3EL

Description

A one bedroom third floor flat forming part of this established residential development. The property is presented in reasonable condition throughout and offers an excellent buy-to-let investment opportunity. The accommodation benefits from electric heating, double glazing and a corner position, providing views from both the lounge and bedroom windows.

Accommodation

Ground Floor: Stairs to all Floors. Third Floor: Landing, Entrance Hall, Lounge, Kitchen, Bedroom, Bathroom. External: Maintained Communal Garden Area.

Location

Conveniently located for a range of local amenities, within easy reach of frequent bus services, The Galleries Shopping Centre and Retail Park, with transport links via the A1 and A19.

Tenure / Property Information

Investment Analysis

Same-development completed sales range from £15,000 to £35,000: £15,000, £18,000, £20,000, £25,000 and £35,000. The evidence supports a broad £15,000–£35,000 value range. A base GDV of £20,000 is a cautious estimate, reflecting the subject's reasonable condition but also its remaining 52-year lease. This is an estimate, not a formal valuation.

Investment Snapshot

Strategy Recommendation

Proceed only subject to legal review of the 52-year lease, service charge, ground rent, seller fees and mortgageability. A cautious cash-based BTL may be possible if the £600 pcm asking rent is achievable, but the evidence does not support an aggressive bid or a dependable BRRR/flip margin.

Works Required

No specific refurbishment works are evidenced. Allow for inspection, compliance checks and any minor maintenance identified before letting; costs cannot be estimated from the supplied information.

Rental & Market Context

Sold Comparables

The following completed sales were identified within approximately 5 miles:

Potential BRRR Position

At the £20,000 base GDV, 75% refinancing equates to £15,000. Total acquisition and works cost cannot be calculated because refurbishment costs and any seller fees are unknown; the £1,800 buyer administration charge is known. The short remaining lease and unknown property charges make refinance viability uncertain.

Buy-to-Let Analysis

The £600 pcm one-bedroom asking rent implies £7,200 annual rent and a theoretical 48.0% gross yield on the £15,000 guide, before costs. The separate £2,600 pcm listing is materially inconsistent and should not be relied upon without verification. Service charge, ground rent and any letting or finance costs are unknown, so a dependable net yield cannot be established. The 52-year lease may also restrict mortgageability and resale demand.

Flip Analysis

Using the £20,000 base GDV, resale potential is supported by nearby completed sales, but a reliable flip surplus cannot be calculated because works, seller fees and other disposal costs are not supplied. The £15,000 guide plus the known £1,800 administration charge is £16,800 before those unknown costs.

Investor Risks & Due Diligence

• Only 52 years remain on the lease, potentially affecting mortgageability, resale and lease-extension cost.

• Annual service charge, ground rent, review period and increases are not supplied.

• The seller may charge additional completion fees under the special conditions.

• Rental evidence is inconsistent, ranging from £600 pcm to £2,600 pcm, and both figures are asking rents rather than achieved rents.

• No refurbishment budget can be established from the supplied evidence.

• EPC D and electric heating may affect running costs and tenant appeal.

Recommendation

Proceed only subject to legal review of the 52-year lease, service charge, ground rent, seller fees and mortgageability. A cautious cash-based BTL may be possible if the £600 pcm asking rent is achievable, but the evidence does not support an aggressive bid or a dependable BRRR/flip margin.

Strategy Rating

Analysis Confidence

There are five same-development completed sales and one plausible one-bedroom rental listing, but the lease has only 52 years remaining, property charges and seller fees are unknown, refurbishment costs are not evidenced, and the rental evidence is materially inconsistent.