# Basement reno



## Fisherman30 (Dec 5, 2018)

So, for those of you who have seen my money diary, you will know that I've been working for about 9 months trying to pay off debt as quickly as possible. With that being said, I don't want to buy a bigger/fancier house. We have a 1250sqft, 3 bedroom bungalow, with a basement. Our first baby is due in January, and we plan on having at least one more after that. The basement is partially finished (exterior walls spray foamed before I bought the place, a fair bit of framing done around the exterior walls, a fair bit of electrical, plumbing done etc). I'm thinking in order to have the basement professionally done by a contractor with all permits, etc. it will probably cost $30 000-$40 000 for this work to be done. I would not go into further debt for this money. I would wait until my debts are paid off, and I save up enough to pay cash. Is that a smart idea? Would a $30-$40k professional basement renovation increase the value of the house by approximately the same amount? I'm thinking it's a smarter financial decision than buying a bigger/newer house down the road. With that being said, if I had $40k in the bank, plus the equity built up in our current house, we could buy a nicer/newer/bigger house, but that would put us in more debt, which I'm trying to avoid.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Probably a good idea to avoid borrowing, if possible.

As for the reno cost being reflected in the property value, I would say that's a difficult call. It's a maybe, I would say, depending on many variables. Those would include the local market, what other similar houses have to offer, etc. If your house is already at the higher end of the comparables, maybe putting more into it won't add so much. Also, if it's an old building, maybe not much recovery will be seen. By way of personal anecdote, some years ago, my wife and I bought a 1300-square-foot bungalow in Vancouver's Kerrisdale area. It was built in 1914 and had various upgrades over the years, but it was still a 1914 bungalow. We bought when the previous owner decided to sell, because he wanted more space for a family. He left behind some architect's drawings for expansion/renovation. Nice plans. But he decided in the end that it was better just to buy what suited, ready-made. I think he was right.

After 10 years in that house, we found it was starting to need some significant work. The old wood-framed windows needed replacing, the roof was old, the exterior cedar shingles were past their prime, etc., etc. We debated spending the money. We had paid not much more than lot value for the place and we considered that even with extensive and expensive upgrades, the place would still be seen in the market as a 1914 bungalow, not a hot item. The other choice was to tear down and start all over. We sold for lot value (5 times what we paid 10 years before, despite interest rates in those 10 years never dropping below about 11%). I cannot resist adding that comment for the benefit of those who insist on saying that Canadian house prices have achieved lofty peaks in recent times, fuelled by low interest rates. I can think of no Canadian market where houses have gone up 5-fold in 10 years in all the years of cheap interest. Can anyone here?

Another consideration is how long you see yourself staying in the house. If it's, say, 10 or more years, I would say spend the money to make it how you would like it now, regardless of whether there is some immediate or long-term payback.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

There is a chance that if you did the work yourself, you might get the materials costs to be reflected in the new house valuation, but almost never when you pay the significantly increased cost of using contractors.

I can't say how handy you are or how much time you have or the access to friends but with the internet and youtube, you could probably become fairly proficient in the framing and wallboarding, even the electrical, by the time you saved up the money. You will need help anyway. These types of jobs are very difficult for one person. Sometimes you just need someone to hold the other end of the tape measure, etc. so if you have a friend that is handy with some of this stuff, all the better. Well worth the cost of beer and pizza. Even $15 or $20 per hour is a steal if you have the right person. Contractors will be a lot more then that.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

You are making good progress trying to get out of debt and get ahead. 
I would think very carefully about plunging into selling and buying a new house - that process will chew up lots of money, both one-time and ongoing, more than just your new monthly mortgage costs. Paying for 'the house' is the millstone that keeps many families underwater.
Are there really compelling reasons to leave the house you are currently in?

All that said, no, I would not finish the basement just prior to selling. I've seen suggestions that you will get 70% of your investment out, and that depends on the shape the balance of the house is in, esp. kitchen and washrroom(s).


----------



## Fisherman30 (Dec 5, 2018)

These are all good points. I'm leaning towards saving up my money after getting the debt paid off, finishing the basement with maybe a 4th bedroom down there, and then there would be ample space for my family/visitors. I will look into figuring out how to do the work myself, but I do think you get what you pay for, when it comes to skilled trades.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

I would say that finishing a basement in a bungalow will bring in more value than a basement in say a cottage. Many will find good use in that, although, I don't see you getting the equivalent value in cost.

I agree with doing the work yourself. The fact that you're walls are already insulated and partly framed puts you way ahead of the game. You're biggest feat will be a bathroom (assuming you're putting one and no kitchen either). Putting down some floors and gyps on walls is not rocket-science. Look it up on YouTube and if you are determined to do it yourself, you will definitely learn. Maybe higher a plumber and/or electrician at best.

Then again, $40k is peanuts compared to moving. Bigger house comes with bigger mortgage, expenses, and all the legal costs combined.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Fisherman30 said:


> The basement is partially finished (exterior walls spray foamed before I bought the place, a fair bit of framing done around the exterior walls, a fair bit of electrical, plumbing done etc). I'm thinking in order to have the basement professionally done by a contractor with all permits, etc. it will probably cost $30 000-$40 000 for this work to be done.


Do you have any DIY skills? With a lot of the work already done (spray foam, plumbing, electrical) a handy person could finish it themselves for under $10k, depending on finishes, etc.


----------



## Fisherman30 (Dec 5, 2018)

I have some handy skills, and like someone else said, I can learn most tasks with regard to finishing on YouTube these days. There was a partial bathroom installed by the previous owner, and they did a very bad job. Same can be said with their electrical work. I think I I'll have to get a certified plumber and electrician to get proper permits, and fix the previous owner's "handy work". I'll also have to get a plumber to install a backwater valve and sump pump. Once that stuff is done, I should be able to finish up the interior framing, flooring, ceiling, and any other finishing touches.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

There are very few people who can DIY to the standards of a professional. I consider myself to be quite handy but would never undertake a major renovation of even a bathroom or kitchen. It's important to know your own limits. A DIY job that is obviously a DIY job will NOT increase your house value however much money you 'saved' doing it.

It can make sense though in my opinion to work WITH a contractor who will agree to you putting in 'sweat equity' under his supervision. In other words, he saves hiring one labourer and you save the cost of one labourer.

Doing electrical and plumbing work yourself can affect your house insurance. For example, we had a braided pipe from our kitchen faucet burst during the night and when we got up in the morning, the kitchen floor was flooded and the water had drained down through into the basement. Major disaster. When the insurance company adjuster came to inspect the damage etc. one of the questions he quite sneakily asked went something like this. 'That's a nice looking faucet, it looks quite new, did you change it yourself?' IF the answer had been yes, our insurance coverage would have been voided. ALL plumbing and electrical work not done by a professional is not covered under house insurance and it makes sense that it is not. People often don't consider that putting new shingles on their roofs themselves and then discovering a leak some time later is likely to mean their insurance won't cover the damage. Never admit to even having changed a light bulb yourself is my advice.

Drywall is often something people will attempt to DIY. Have you ever watched a professional drywaller do their job from start to finish? We had a ceiling replaced some time ago. Ripping out the old one was easy, anyone could have done that. Putting up the new drywall panels would have been doable too I suppose although watching them do it, it was obvious it would be far harder for me to do without 2 people and the right equipment. But what was most interesting to observe was the taping and sanding. That was a major part of the job. They plastered and sanded each joint at least 6 times. That is a heck of a lot of time spent getting it perfect. 

My neighbour has a living room ceiling that hangs in waves. That's the only way I can describe it, the middle of the panels are lower than the edges of the drywall panels and it is obvious where each panel begins and ends. 

My advice for any DIY is always do what you know you can do or are relatively confident you can learn 'on the job' to do but KNOW your limits. Otherwise, you may well end up with it finished for $10k as Prairie Guy suggests and it may well LOOK like a $10k DIY job.


----------



## Video_Frank (Aug 2, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> ALL plumbing and electrical work not done by a professional is not covered under house insurance and it makes sense that it is not.


Total and complete bullshit. Please provide a citation. You need to notify your insurance company if you make a major change.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Video_Frank said:


> Total and complete bullshit. Please provide a citation. You need to notify your insurance company if you make a major change.


Well, I might not go so far as to call it "total and complete bullshit". That's maybe too strong. Perhaps it's more in the nature of an airy trifling with the truth.

I just took the time to review one of our house policies and I found nothing in it about the policy being "voided" if I did any work on the place myself. 



Longtimeago said:


> ALL plumbing and electrical work not done by a professional is not covered under house insurance and it makes sense that it is not. People often don't consider that putting new shingles on their roofs themselves and then discovering a leak some time later is likely to mean their insurance won't cover the damage.


What "makes sense" to LTA makes no sense to me. If his sweeping statements are correct, many of us lack the coverage we think we have. I have owned a number of old houses, that have changed hands many times. How can I be sure no previous owner did not undertake some non-"professional" work at some time in the past? Or do LTA's policies have some kind of a forgiveness provision for DIY work about which the current owner is ignorant, or had no hand in, and merely stipulate that it better not be he who did the impugned work. 

I'll go further and risk the BS calumny being hurled at me by expressing doubt about the bald proposition of the need to notify of a "major change". The example given if one follows Video_Frank's "major change" link is hardly supportive of anything. It too is penned in broad strokes, but when it comes to giving a concrete example, the author resorts to an extreme example of some guy converting his single-family home into a duplex. Well, yeah, I would say that results in a major change in the risk the insurer should know about, regardless of the policy wording.

What I know of insurance law (and it's a fair amount), tells me that what must be disclosed by insured to insurer is anything that it "material to the risk". A worthwhile discussion of that concept may be found in this BC case:

_Swiss Reinsurance Company _v. _Camarin Limited_, 2015 BCCA 466. https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/ca/15/04/2015BCCA0466cor1.htm#SCJTITLEBookMark231 The judgment runs to 43 pages, but a good read.

The test was deftly stated thus in _Lazaraki_s v. _Saskatchewan Mutual Insurance Co_. S.C., Fraser J., Vancouver C943534, May 23, 1996 , 10pp.:

"The question of materiality is a question of fact for
the court.

The burden of proof of materiality is on the insurer.
It is a question of fact in each case whether, if the
matters misrepresented had been truly disclosed, they
would, on a fair consideration of the evidence, have
influenced a reasonable insurer to decline a risk or to
have stipulated for a higher premium."

https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/96/07/s96-0753.txt

To all of the foregoing I would add that there can be nothing wrong in erring on the side of caution and ring up the insurer every time you hang a picture, or whatever.

And now, see how, once again, a quite mundane little thread has been totally and shamelessly overtaken in a manner much condemned by LTA in these words:



Longtimeago said:


> Let's be honest here, some posters as shown on this thread, take great pleasure in demonstrating their 'expertise' in a given subject to the extent that demonstrating that is obviously more important than trying to help someone asking a question. No one here had any real reason to respond beyond their first response to the OP. Everything after that is about responses back and forth between posters. The OP posted insufficient information in the OP on which anyone could give a relevant response beyond a few general remarks. Yet here we are on page 4, why is that? It certainly is not for the OP's edification.


Of course, LTA is altogether too proper to ever seek to display his erudition on a particular subject unless called upon, yea entreatied, to do so. He has that uncanny ability to be able to judge to a nicety just what is called for. Sadly, I lack that sense of decorum and will take any opportunity to deliver a treatise on any topic that strikes my fancy, even where wholly unwelcome.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Longtimeago said:


> There are very few people who can DIY to the standards of a professional. I consider myself to be quite handy but would never undertake a major renovation of even a bathroom or kitchen. It's important to know your own limits. A DIY job that is obviously a DIY job will NOT increase your house value however much money you 'saved' doing it.


I'm currently dong a major renovation of my house...I'm doing almost all the work except for rough in plumbing and mudding. Two new bathrooms, redo of an existing bathroom, among may other things. I estimate less than $15k total, and probably savings of $30,000 based on the extent of the work.



> It can make sense though in my opinion to work WITH a contractor who will agree to you putting in 'sweat equity' under his supervision. In other words, he saves hiring one labourer and you save the cost of one labourer.


I agree.



> Doing electrical and plumbing work yourself can affect your house insurance.


If the electrical and plumbing passes inspection then it's valid for insurance purposes.



> My advice for any DIY is always do what you know you can do or are relatively confident you can learn 'on the job' to do but KNOW your limits. Otherwise, you may well end up with it finished for $10k as Prairie Guy suggests and it may well LOOK like a $10k DIY job.


You have to know your limitations and be realistic. I'll post pics when my project is done. It certainly won't look like a bad DIY job.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Prairie Guy said:


> I'm currently dong a major renovation of my house...I'm doing almost all the work except for rough in plumbing and mudding. Two new bathrooms, redo of an existing bathroom, among may other things. I estimate less than $15k total, and probably savings of $30,000 based on the extent of the work.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm fine with all of that Prairie Guy. You know your limits, I don't, so I am quite willing to take your word for it that your work will look professional when finished. But as we have both said, you have to know your limits and unfortunately, many don't.

When we moved into the house we currently live in, the previous owner had done a kitchen and bathroom reno as well as a lot of basic things like painting rooms, installing new baseboards etc. Everything he had done was obvious and poorly done. We liked the house layout, the lot size and the location. What was inside we knew we would change almost entirely. When my wife looked at the kitchen and his DIY reno of it, she was quite happy to see they had not had a kitchen reno company do a professional job but use cabinets she would not have chosen etc. It's hard to justify tearing out a kitchen or bathroom that has had a professional renovation fairly recently but is not to your taste. It's real easy to justify tearing out a lousy DIY job. All in how you look at it right.

When we made our offer on the house, we knew the comparables for the area and the price that had been paid when it was last sold. Our price offered reflected our having to tear out the kitchen and bathroom as well as totally repainting, etc. Frankly, all his work got him zero extra money on the sale to us. When a situation like that happens is when I think a lot of house sellers get angry because they can't get offers that they THINK they should after the work they've done on it. They would have been better off to just leave it as it was when they bought it and just realized the price increase that time brought them.

That guy didn't even realize that his limitations didn't even extend to doing baseboards. I mean he did butt joints at corners instead of mitred joints! A baseboard painted white without using masking tape to keep from over-painting onto the wall! Patching a hole in a wall and leaving the patch quite visible but just painted over!


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Regarding insurance and DIY. As our esteemed fellow poster and lawyer Mukhang pera will tell us all, there is the law, there is interpretation of the law and there is enforcement of the law.

I agree with Prairie Guy that if you did some plumbing or electrical work yourself and THEN had it inspected and passed it would be valid for insurance purposes. But in fact, how many DIY jobs do you think people even check to see if they need a Building Permit for or have inspected even if they don't need a Permit? A large percentage of all DIY jobs are done without any of that. When that happens, you GIVE the insurance company a point to argue and if the dollar amount involved is large enough, they will argue it.

Every insurance company has a department that does not exist on any company structure chart. That is the 'Denial of Claims' department and it is the FIRST department that any claim goes through. If they see any possibility of arguing against a claim they will deny the claim. Some people believe although I don't personally do so, that they will deny every claim as a standard response and then see how many come back to argue it.

Every insurance policy has a clause depending on the type of insurance, that reads something like a version of, 'due care'. It is a 'get out of fail free card' for the insurance company if they choose to use it. If you installed a kitchen faucet yourself and then had a leak that resulted in flooding of part of your house and a claim of say $25k, you can bet your butt they will exercise that clause and you will have to at least go through a lot of hassle to get them to pay out. They don't need a clause that says, 'no DIY is covered', that 'due care' type clause covers it for them. 

It doesn't matter if you in fact installed that faucet exactly as per the manufacturer's instructions and you can get a qualified plumber to testify that you did a perfect job and that it was perfectly obvious that there was a manufacturing defect in the product, the point is YOU will have to fight to get your claim paid. All because you left the insurance company an opening to argue that YOU were responsible for the flooding when you did something yourself. 

Now I'll tell you how you will know this is true. How many people have you heard talking about how they had a claim denied and were fighting with their insurance company to get paid? Any kind of insurance, not just house insurance. Forums of all kinds are full of such stories. People complaining about insurance claims is an everyday thing akin to people saying 'never trust a used car salesman'. It's like a universal belief.

In travel, you hear of pregnant women who went on vacation and then gave birth while on that vacation and were then told their travel medical insurance would not pay the hospital costs because while the woman was insured, the baby was NOT. Happens all the time, makes the news and people are surprised to discover the reality of who is and is not insured! https://business.financialpost.com/...nant-moms-need-to-know-about-travel-insurance

Or another example, someone has their purse or camera stolen off the arm of their chair in a restaurant. They have insurance for theft and make a claim. The insurer responds, 'this claim is denied as the insured did not take 'due care'. 

I will plead 'mea culpa' in terms of my having said a policy will be void. That is not strictly true. But what is true is that if the insurance company sees a way to argue a claim and it is a large enough claim for them to bother about, they will argue it. So OK, doing some DIY may not 'void' the policy but it may well result in a denied claim and then YOU have to deal with the consequences of that.

To me it is like the person who is denied boarding on a flight for whatever reason and then argues, 'legally, they had no right to deny me boarding'. In the meantime, the plane has left the tarmac and you are still standing on the ground. Being legally in the right does not get you to where you wanted to be. Being legally in the right when it comes to an insurance claim does you no good if they deny the claim and you then have to fight for compensation. Same thing. So the less opportunity you provide for them to deny a claim the better it will be for you.

When in my real life example of the insurance adjuster asking me if I had installed a kitchen faucet myself, it was obvious he was looking for an 'out' but my reply of it had been done by a qualified plumber was enough to close that door immediately.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

I will agree with LTA that, in short, insurance companies make their money collecting premiums, not paying claims. So yes, they will duck and weave and look for some basis on which to allege a policy breach, a misrepresentation, or whatever it takes to avoid paying out. It is for that reason I suggested that one might want to consider over-reporting changes and taking a very cautious approach to home renos, etc., to give the insurer fewer holes to shoot through. 

I have no doubt many claims are denied to those who are "legally right", as commented by LTA. As a practical matter, it will more often than not cost too much to retain counsel to take the steps necessary to prove that one is right. Even if you decide to pursue legal channels, the insurer will pit its resources against you and make sure you face some pretty big legal bills long before you see the inside of a courtroom. As has been said, with some truth: "Justice is open to every man; just like the Ritz Hotel".


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Mukhang pera said:


> I will agree with LTA that, in short, insurance companies make their money collecting premiums, not paying claims. So yes, they will duck and weave and look for some basis on which to allege a policy breach, a misrepresentation, or whatever it takes to avoid paying out. It is for that reason I suggested that one might want to consider over-reporting changes and taking a very cautious approach to home renos, etc., to give the insurer fewer holes to shoot through.
> 
> I have no doubt many claims are denied to those who are "legally right", as commented by LTA. As a practical matter, it will more often than not cost too much to retain counsel to take the steps necessary to prove that one is right. Even if you decide to pursue legal channels, the insurer will pit its resources against you and make sure you face some pretty big legal bills long before you see the inside of a courtroom. As has been said, with some truth: "Justice is open to every man; just like the Ritz Hotel".


In travel forums Mukhang pera I often have arguments over this kind of thing with people who want to argue that they are 'legally right' but ignore the fact that being legally right does not help them avoid the consequences of some action they are contemplating where they will 'assert their rights'. Like the being denied boarding on a plane and watching the plane depart without them example I gave.

An acquaintance of mine recently had a disagreement over some tree pruning along a property line. These trees were in fact on the neighbour's side of the property line. My acquaintance hired a certified arborist to prune some of these trees which had branches overhanging his house to a considerable degree. He did not want to risk a large branch falling on his roof. The neighbour was advised in advance pruning was going to be done and raised no objection. On the day the pruning was done, the neighbour was present and the arborist told the neighbour they would prune in accordance with 'best practice' which would mean cutting branches back to the trunk of the trees, not just a straight cut 'up' over the property line which would not be good both for the health of the trees or the aesthetics when finished. The neighbour raised no objections.

After the work was done however the neighbour was not happy as it resulted in his property being far more visible from the road. He lost 'privacy' in other words. Being angry about that, he threatened my acquaintance that he was going to 'call the police and charge him with trespass'. He indeed did call the police who came and heard both sides of the story. No charge of trespass was made by the police against my acquaintance since the arborist confirmed that the neighbour had been advised of what was going to be done and raised no objection. 

Now the neighbour is threatening to 'sue your ***' if his trees start to die because the branches were cut right back to the trunk. The law does say that while you own the parts of the tree that extend above and below your property (overhanging branches and underground roots) and have the right to cut them, at the same time you cannot do anything that will harm the tree's health. So in theory the neighbour could sue if a tree dies as a result of the pruning.

But there of course is the 'rub'. Unless the tree were to die within say a month of the pruning, just how could the neighbour ever prove the pruning was the cause of a tree dying? He has the 'right' to sue, but that will not pay his legal costs to do so or provide him with any assurance of winning his case in court. To me it is a perfect example of someone who thinks their 'rights' mean something when in fact in practical terms they mean nothing much at all and the consequences of trying to exert their 'rights' will in practical terms result in costing them time, money, and hassle far beyond what is justified.

Often people who insist on their 'legal rights' end up cutting off their nose to spite their face as they say.

But equally important in this tree pruning example and what makes it relevant here is what MIGHT have happened if my acquaintance had taken a DIY approach to the pruning. He would not have been able to close the door on a trespass charge being laid by the police so easily if he did not have the arborist to tell the police officer that the work was done by a certified arborist using 'best practice' and also confirm the neighbour had been made aware of what was being done. Nor would the acquaintance have had that same arborist to be available to testify if the neighbour later tries to sue if a tree dies.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Longtimeago said:


> I'm fine with all of that Prairie Guy. You know your limits, I don't, so I am quite willing to take your word for it that your work will look professional when finished. But as we have both said, you have to know your limits and unfortunately, many don't.
> 
> When we moved into the house we currently live in, the previous owner had done a kitchen and bathroom reno as well as a lot of basic things like painting rooms, installing new baseboards etc. Everything he had done was obvious and poorly done. We liked the house layout, the lot size and the location. What was inside we knew we would change almost entirely. When my wife looked at the kitchen and his DIY reno of it, she was quite happy to see they had not had a kitchen reno company do a professional job but use cabinets she would not have chosen etc. It's hard to justify tearing out a kitchen or bathroom that has had a professional renovation fairly recently but is not to your taste. It's real easy to justify tearing out a lousy DIY job. All in how you look at it right.
> 
> ...


Knowing your skillset and limitations is key. I helped my friend do his basement a few years ago...I didn't want to do it all and he had limited skills. We (mostly me with his help) did the framing, basic electrical, and drywall. He also hired a plumber (rough in was done when they bought the house) to install a pre-fab shower. I installed the toilet and vanity. After the electrical was inspected we hung drywall and he hired a mudder….a good mudder is worth their weight in gold.

Then him and his wife painted...anyone can paint. I gave him a start on the suspended ceiling and once he was comfortable he finished it himself. He was going to hire someone for baseboards and casing but I convinced him to buy a miter saw and I gave him another lesson. I also laid down a sheet of vinyl in the bathroom, we both put carpet in the bedroom (no seam), and I gave him a lesson on how to lay vinyl plank flooring for the rest.

When it was all said and done he had a nice basement and didn't have to pay $40k to get it.


----------



## Fisherman30 (Dec 5, 2018)

Thanks for all the tips! I've come up with a plan that I will think increase the value of the house quite a bit, and shouldn't cost me more than about $12 000 all said and done. I am going to go ahead and frame up some interior walls in the basement to make a 4th bedroom down there, and a rec room. I got an electrician to give me a quote for work I want him to do. This includes updating my messy 100 A panel which is already at full capacity, and a huge mess of wires done by the previous owner, inspecting/correcting the work done by the previous owner, adding 13 pot lights to the ceiling, wiring up some new outlets to the rooms I am going to add, and getting the required permit. This will cost about $3500. I also have an HVAC company coming to change the ducts around that so they don't hang so low from the ceiling in certain areas. I expect this will cost a few hundred dollars. I will hire a window company to cut the concrete around an existing window to install an egress window, dig the window well and get the appropriate permit. This will cost about $2000. I will dig the window well myself, and hopefully save a couple hundred $$. I will hire a plumber to inspect the previous owners work, bring it up to code, install a backwater valve and sump pump/pit. This will cost about $3000. All of the finishing work (drywall, sound deadening material in the ceiling, suspended ceiling, flooring, paint, interior doors, fixtures etc.), I will do myself. I'm not going to get it all done right away, but if I can get the electrical done, and frame up the interior walls over the winter, I'll be happy.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Fisherman30 said:


> .I will hire a window company to cut the concrete around an existing window to install an egress window, dig the window well and get the appropriate permit. This will cost about $2000. I will dig the window well myself, and hopefully save a couple hundred $$.


I had the basement walls cut so I could add 2 new windows several years ago but rather than calling a window company I called a concrete cutting/coring company. I bought the windows in advance so I knew what size the rough opening needed to be, then marked it on the wall. They cut the opening and then it was a simple matter to attach 2"x10" faming around the inside of opening and then install the windows to that.

Tip 1: If you're getting the concrete cut it's a messy job...lots of dust and water as they use water to cool the blade and/or keep the dust down. You'd be best to put up some plastic and/or move things out of the way.

Tip 2: It's usually a good idea to run a section of weeping tile from the window well down to the existing weeping tiles...this ensures that during heavy rain or snow melt that the window well doesn't fill up with water and drains away easily rather than finding its way into the basement through the window. 

Tip 3: If you're planning on digging yourself that might be more digging than you'd prefer to do so it might be worth a couple hundred (or less) to have someone with a bucket machine dig down for you, especially if you're going down to the weeping tiles. You can always backfill yourself...it's a lot easier to fill a hole than to dig one.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

It all depends on the standards of finishes , 10 years ago we spent $31000 just on materials at home depot to finish 1300 sq ft in our basement ,the sub-floor alone was $2900.My husband is in the trades and a licensed plumber so that cost was zero but we did pay electrician even with my husband running all the wires and only paying for the actual connection that bill was over $3000 .We also hired a professional mudder because nothing worst than seeing drywall seams !The framing probably would save about $5000 but still lots to do .In Ontario generally you double the value on material costs , if you are paying contractor rates you wont lose money but the profits go to them so can be a break even cost.What is does do is make your house more attractive to more buyers as double the square footage can accommodate larger family or blended family but you need to finish your basement to same standard as rest of house.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

marina628 said:


> It all depends on the standards of finishes , 10 years ago we spent $31000 just on materials at home depot to finish 1300 sq ft in our basement ,the sub-floor alone was $2900.


Mind sharing what you used as a sub floor for the basement? I looked into a few options - panels (Dricore, etc.), DIY plywood flooring (plastic, foam insulation, etc.). After reading horror stories with regards to humidity, moisture, mold, etc., I have been leaning away from a wood sub floor and towards some sort of inorganic laminate flooring that has an insulated layer built in. My basement is dry as a bone but I'm still hesitant to put a wood sub floor down in a basement- even with proper air gaps, etc. Huge expense should there be any water damage from a burst pipe, moisture buildup over time, etc.

...........

A finished basement can be a good investment IMO, that is as long as you don't spend too much $. No different than any level of the house, some people put way more money into the reno's than they'll ever be able to get back. A good real estate agent that knows the local market well should be able to provide some advice.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Synergy said:


> Mind sharing what you used as a sub floor for the basement? I looked into a few options - panels (Dricore, etc.), DIY plywood flooring (plastic, foam insulation, etc.). After reading horror stories with regards to humidity, moisture, mold, etc., I have been leaning away from a wood sub floor and towards some sort of inorganic laminate flooring that has an insulated layer built in. My basement is dry as a bone but I'm still hesitant to put a wood sub floor down in a basement- even with proper air gaps, etc. Huge expense should there be any water damage from a burst pipe, moisture buildup over time, etc.
> 
> ...........
> 
> A finished basement can be a good investment IMO, that is as long as you don't spend too much $. No different than any level of the house, some people put way more money into the reno's than they'll ever be able to get back. A good real estate agent that knows the local market well should be able to provide some advice.


No matter how dry your basement feels, a good subfloor is critical if you're considering using wood lats. A vapor barrier is the first thing to lay on the concrete and then you build up from there. Screw in 1x3 or 2x3 joists for the air gap and then close off with 3/4 inch plywood. 

You can go cheaper and just use a thicker underlay as the vapor barrier and then lay a 12mm floating floor. Advantage here is you wont have any issues with moisture since floating floors adapt well. Alternative is vinyl which is sure to be moisture resistant.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

Mortgage u/w said:


> No matter how dry your basement feels, a good subfloor is critical if you're considering using wood lats. A vapor barrier is the first thing to lay on the concrete and then you build up from there. Screw in 1x3 or 2x3 joists for the air gap and then close off with 3/4 inch plywood.
> 
> You can go cheaper and just use a thicker underlay as the vapor barrier and then lay a 12mm floating floor. Advantage here is you wont have any issues with moisture since floating floors adapt well. Alternative is vinyl which is sure to be moisture resistant.


Thanks. I'm leaning towards vinyl plank flooring with a built in underlayment. Some of the higher quality vinyl flooring is actually pretty nice.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

I love the use of vinyl planks. Very nice indeed, especially the 'wood look' ones. I've used them many times in the kitchen floors of my rental units.


----------

