RETIREMENT FLAT OR BUNGALOW ?

Just a thought re bungalows - my folks moved to one when they were about mid 60s - not because they particularly wanted a bungalow, but because it was all they could find in their chosen area.
However after about 3 years they decided they didn't like the area after all, and moved again, to a house. But they said that the lack of stairs for 3 years had really affected their levels of fitness.
I know she was very lucky mobility-wise, but my mother was still well able to manage stairs when she finally moved to a care home at 89 (because of dementia.)

When I was a volunteer Home Visitor with Age UK, I visited a lot of retirement flats and my main impression of them was how small they were, especially those built by the market leaders. Kitchens were little more than galleys, 'bath'rooms only had showers, no option of a bath and living rooms assumed you did nothing all day but watch tv and eat on a tray on your lap. I said then, and I have no reason to change my view, that living in one of these tiny flats would drive me to drink within a twelve month, especially if I was not very mobile.

My first choice would be a decent sized 1960s/70s flat, like my DS's first home with a big living room, 2 bedrooms and hall that would easily accommodate a wheel chair. The block required key entry and there was an active Management Company owned by the flat owners, not the construction company or any commercial company.

The thing that would concern me about a flat, is noise. I lived briefly between house moves in a ground floor flat which I owned as a letting property and was nearly driven bonkers by the noise of movements/creaking (no voice noise) from upstairs. It was a 25 year old purpose built block and my previous tenants had never complained of any irritating sounds! How can you find out beforehand that it is noise free? Probably impossible as the seller wouldn't willingly volunteer such information.

Retirement complexes in my experience dont care about your needs once they've taken your money & tied you in. They just care about maintaining the flat as-is so they can sell it again once you die or move on.

I feel quite stongly that a lot of them are hard selling crooks.

(Its not really about firedoors which are usually a good thing. Its about having the right/freedom to make adaptations)

Firstly, so sorry about your predicament Violette. Don’t know anything about retirement flats so cannot say anything about them. If it was me I would go for a bungalow. Compact, small garden, often low maintenance.

Internal firedoors can cause problems when people become frail as they are heavy to open. Unless they are left permanently open with a door stop which then makes them less safe in a fire than normal non fire doors which are closed.

I once visited a lady who was pretty much trapped in her lounge in a retirement complex because her fire doors became too heavy for her to manage and the building warden punished people who jammed them open (these were INTERNAL doors within her flat not communal area doors). She also couldn't come and go because the communal halls had such heavy fire doors.

Essentially, in her case, the fire doors became a fire hazard because A. They trapped her and B. forced her into one room living.

Fire doors are great and save lives. But the lack of flexibility and adaptability in her new retirement flat in her case turned a safety feature into a death trap as she wasnt allowed to go for a second best option IYKWIM

I wouldn’t be put off by a new flat. My flat is ten years old. All the doors are fire doors, the insulation and soundproofing is excellent, and all the rooms are accessible by wheelchair, and the shower is huge and is easily accessible.

The park homes I visit are VERY sociable..that wouldnt work for me. I prefer to dip in and dip out regarding socialising with neighbours & them knowing everything about my life.

It seems to be regarded as a positive by the residents though.

There are also rules regarding overnight guests and you couldnt take in a lodger. Rules re pets vary. I dont know how it would work with overnight carers if theyre under 65/55/whatever??

Also round here park homes tend to be independently run whereas most holiday parks are chains. That can be good or bad...depending on who owns the site.

And fees are higher in holiday parks. Park homes are however much harder to get. Wait lists can be years long but that may vary regionally.

Park homes are not to be confused with static caravans on leisure sites - they're the ones who stipulate that the caravans cannot be more than a certain age.
Around here both do.
But you cannot live in a holiday park year round.

A Retirement Apartment may be more costly but the peace and security as you get older is worth every penny,do away with all those niggles and headaches home maintenance and gardening ..........enjoy life because at this last stage we do not get offered too many oppertunities.

Good Luck Violette and I am sure you have chosen a delightful area so shall look forward to the tales after you settle in!

Park homes are not to be confused with static caravans on leisure sites - they're the ones who stipulate that the caravans cannot be more than a certain age.

We’ve been in our bungalow for 20 years - forward planning when we were in our forties! Large garden but my husband was a builder rather than a gardener so has slowly made it low maintenance replacing trees and hedging with fencing and most lawns for paviors and golden gravel. Have tubs for flowers & shrubs, rockeries and herb garden so an hour a week in summer and even less in winter keeps it neat. Lovely neighbours in the cul de sac all keep an eye out for each other so I’d recommend one over an apartment with fees etc

If you go for a flat view older builds. They tend to have wider doors and more solid walls so easier to adjust. Older buildings are more "dementia friendly" (landmarking etc) 1930s - 1960s flats tend to have good wide adaptable spaces. Modern build flats use all kinds of space saving tricks like non standard sized doors (which you may not initially notice until you try to move in equipment or a wheelchair)

Have mostly seen/heard good things about over 50s park homes. Here are the points from some I visited:

-Almost all have a good community
-They can be narrow and obvs cannot accommodate ceiling hoists or weight bearing handles
-They CAN be made wheelchair friendly, most mobile home brands make wrap around ramps that can be added
- They can have LOOOOONG waiting lists
- Contracts may stipulate that you can only put a mobile home which is less than X yrs old on the site so you need to budget for that
- Some are dodgy and on land that wouldnt otherwise be occupied eg flood planes

So pros and cons there. Consider/view them but buyer beware & all that.

Violette we bought a bungalow, all the advantages of an apartment with none of the restrictions.
Buy yourself a small dog for security ( barking) and fitness ( gets you out more.)
Ideally we should have bought one with less garden to take care of, so think about that aspect.
We are near church and shops and a bus route, yet still in a village, although nowhere near the area you mention.

Have you thought about a park home? You pay a monthly fee of around £150 on most sites but the modern ones are lovely, with en suite and bathroom and tend to come fully furnished. You can more or less design your own if you buy new. Yes, they are mobile homes but really regarded as bungalows these days. They're for retired or semi-retired over 50 and seem quite an attractive proposition. We've viewed a few and everyone we've ever spoken to has seemed very happy. They're like small villages really.

(Forgive me for my "worst case scenario" thinking. I work with people whose needs have changed so I look at properties thinking "would it fit a wheelchair?, would a hoist fit there? could you have carers etc"

Im not implying that you need any of that now or soon but I do think you should "future proof" all property purchases. I am much younger than you and would only view homes that could be adjusted for disabilities should anything happen.

IMO bungalows are ideal. You have the option (or not) of a lodger. They are usually very easy to adjust if your mobility needs change. Later on you can have "sleeping nights" carers. They are VERY resellable and can even make you money rather than eat it up with maintenance payments.

We see far more community spirit in normal mixed buildings.

I have visited a lot of retirement flats through work. A few points:

They are run for profit and are often LESS suitable and adjustable for older people if they deteriorate or need to recover from illness than "normal" flats. They are also the most UN dementia-friendly buildings we visit.

Residents often describe them as being less friendly than "normal" apartment buildings and often say that they regret moving and feel isolated now but also tied in (hard to sell & maintenance eating up savings from equity from their previous homes). Communal meeting areas are often not wheelchair accessible, or are through multiple heavy fire doors, and no effort or help is given to the less mobile/able residents to get there.

Lots of rules eg you cannot move in a live in carer, you cannot remove an internal door from the hinges to better fit a wheelchsair, cant make many adjustments or changes. You have better flexibility and options in normal buildings.

They are NOT well designed to accommodate deteriorating mobility etc. "Normal" flats often have wider doors/halls and better more flexible space for OTs to set up adjusted living. I am often frustrated at the trip/falls hazards which are built in in order to maximise profit and cut corners (eg garden flats where the patio doors are not at a level with the ground, and have a drop instead of proper stairs and rails, or better still a ramp! But you CANNOT MAKE CHANGES it in a retirement complex so garden flat buyers often end up not being able to use their patio. Patios also cheaply laid with stepping stones rather than proper patio or decking which would be safer and more usable.

IMO you are better off in a "normal" flat with less rules that isnt run as a business for investors

There are drawbacks to retirement flats, in that a) the service/maintenance charges can be very high, and b) they can be very difficult to sell, certainly for anything like you paid if you bought new. If e.g. you eventually had to sell in order to pay care home fees, this could be a real headache, particularly since hefty charges still have to be paid even if it's empty for months on end.
Just things to bear in mind.

Have you thought at all about a non-retirement flat, in a nice enough area? Perhaps not on the ground floor (security) with a lift?

A friend of mine who also happens to be 71 has just returned after many decades to her native Stockholm, where she's bought a very nice non-retirement flat with a balcony, within easy reach of shops, etc.

I live in an apartment- not a retirement one. I purposely chose a non- retirement apartment because I wanted to be among a mixed society. I feel very safe- there is a keycard main entrance and a four- point locking system on my apartment door. There are lifts, which I use if I have shopping bags or grandchildren with me, and a 24 hour concierge service. I am near a park, an arts centre and bus routes. I feel my apartment is future proof, I never have to worry about a garden ( I have a balcony where I grow flowers, herbs, tomatoes and peas) nor do I have to worry about external maintenance, so, for me, my apartment trumps a bungalow.