Jump to content

Five double bed 3 bathroom Victorian House close to Bellenden Road to rent


dulwichdad

Recommended Posts

This Victorian terrace house offers comfortable accommodation comprising five double bedrooms, three bathrooms, an eat-in Kitchen, a separate living room and a private garden. There is on-street parking.

It is located on a quiet street just around the corner from a small parade of shops in trendy "Bellenden Village"

It has fantastic transport links to both the City and most other parts of London as East Dulwich and Peckham are both minutes walk away.

From Peckham station, you are just four stops on the new "Ginger Line" Overground Tube line to Clapham Junction, seven stops to Hoxton - or two stops on the British Rail to either Victoria or London Bridge.

It comes part-furnished and is ideal for professional sharers.

The kitchen is fully fitted and includes a dishwasher, gas hob, electric oven, large fridge freezer, microwave, and washing machine. There is plenty of room to eat in the kitchen.

The kitchen leads out onto a private side return and rear garden - which is ideal for summer barbeques.

The house is double-glazed and has an energy-efficient boiler.

All five of the bedrooms are light and airy and large enough to fit a double bed and desk, and either have an additional wardrobe or built-in storage space.

The three bathrooms comprise one with a bathtub (with shower over), and two with showers - all have sinks and toilets.

The house is excellently located for professionals working locally or in the City.

Summary & Exclusions:
- Rent Amount: £4,375.00 per month
- Deposit / Bond: £4,475.00
- 5 Bedrooms
- 3 Bathrooms
- Property comes furnished/part furnished
- Available to move in from 08 November 2025
- Maximum number of tenants is 5
- Bills not included
- Parking - On Street
- Sole use of private rear south facing garden
 

IMG_3783.JPEG

IMG_3789.JPEG

IMG_3804.JPEG

IMG_3819.JPEG

IMG_3116.JPG

11 Oglander Road.jpg

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Discussions

    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...