Valuation check: 200 m² apartment in Warsaw, asking PLN 3,930,000 - transaction fees

[handy_page]

With only one completed transaction to compare against, I cannot justify assuming appreciation or relying heavily on broad Warsaw averages.

The apartment is a 2-bed of about 200 m², in average condition, with an asking price of PLN 3,930,000. That works out at PLN 19,650 per m² before adjustments. The light and location are appealing, while the dated finishes and possible transaction costs count against it.

I have three other advertised properties, but asking figures alone do not show where buyers and sellers agreed. Would you estimate the refurbishment cost separately and then test the total price against the sole completed comparable, or apply a size adjustment first? I am also trying to identify the fact that would change the estimate most—exact micro-location, building quality, layout, parking or something else. I will obtain a local appraisal before using the valuation for a decision.

 

[kian_roofs]

I would not apply one blanket percentage for condition. Estimate the work needed to bring it to the same standard as each comparable, then deduct that amount plus some allowance for disruption and uncertainty.

For floor area, compare total prices as well as price per m². A large apartment can show a lower per-m² figure without being worse value, but that relationship is building- and buyer-dependent. The exact micro-location and building would change my view most.

 

[woodworksAndKey]

Does the PLN 3,930,000 include parking, storage or any outdoor space, and do the comparables have the same? At this price those bundled items could distort the apparent per-m² comparison.

I would also want the monthly service charges and the exact ownership or lease position. Two bedrooms across 200 m² is an unusual layout, so usable configuration matters nearly as much as raw area.

 

[kian_roofs]

I agree on separating parking, but I would put the ownership or lease details ahead of micro-location until they are clear. A superb street does not compensate for materially different rights or restrictions.

After that, micro-location becomes decisive: same district is not enough. Light, outlook, noise, floor, lift access and the building's condition can explain a large gap between otherwise similar Warsaw apartments.

 

[anchor.honest]

One completed sale is useful, but it should not automatically anchor the whole valuation. Check when it completed, whether its condition and floor area genuinely match, and whether parking or outdoor space was included. The three listings mainly show sellers' expectations, not achieved value.

I would build a low, base and high case rather than force a precise adjustment from such a thin set of evidence.

 

[anchor.honest]

A practical comparison sheet might help: total price, internal area, price per m², exact location, floor, light/outlook, condition, service charges, parking, storage, outdoor space and tenure or lease details. Keep factual differences separate from estimated adjustments.

For condition, use renovation scenarios rather than labels such as “average.” For the 200 m² size, test both no per-m² discount and a discount supported by the completed comparable. That makes the unsupported assumption visible.

 

[jae.wren]

Also keep transaction costs outside the property valuation. First estimate what the apartment itself is worth; then show acquisition costs separately to reach the total cash required. Otherwise it becomes unclear whether a difference from PLN 3,930,000 reflects the apartment, its condition or fees.

Before the appraisal, I would ask for full details of the completed comparable and confirmation of what is included in this sale, especially parking and storage.