Kirstie and Phil’s love it or list it season 11 episode 1 houses

1. The existing house: Waterfoot’s problem rooms and sentimental ties

The family’s current home in Waterfoot is the episode’s emotional core: Julia and Simon have been in the property for three years and are frustrated by a poor circulation and what the show repeatedly dubs a “roundabout” dining room that undermines the house’s flow, giving Kirstie material to argue for reconfiguration rather than abandonment ^{[1] [2]}. Channel 4’s episode description foregrounds the impractical layout as the central renovation challenge Kirstie must solve with a budget pitched at the cost-equivalent of moving, the series’ standard device for balancing refurb versus relocate options ^{[1] [4]}.

2. Kirstie’s answer: renovate, reconfigure and extend

Kirstie’s strategy in this opener follows the programme’s long-standing playbook: spend wisely to make the house “loveable” again by reworking the layout and, in this episode, pushing ahead with an extension and internal reconfiguration to solve the dysfunctional dining arrangement ^{[4] [3]}. The Herald’s review notes Kirstie “ploughed ahead with an extension,” and cites a renovation figure that contrasts sharply with Phil’s spending ceiling, underscoring how her plan leans on maximizing existing value rather than replacing it outright ^[3].

3. Phil’s hunt: Jackton and a £650k buying envelope

Phil’s counter is a tour of properties likely to tempt sellers, starting with a five-bedroom new build in Jackton priced at over £550k that is praised for turnkey condition but criticised for being overlooked by neighbouring properties — a typical tradeoff Phil emphasizes between convenience and context ^[3]. According to reporting, Phil is working with a buying budget in this episode of roughly £650k, which he uses to show homes that highlight the lifestyle gains of moving rather than renovating ^[3]. The show’s format — Phil’s property hunt vs Kirstie’s renovation plan — is reiterated across listings and streaming descriptions as the episode’s structural engine ^{[5] [4]}.

4. Stakes, budgets and what the episode actually shows

The episode frames the decision with concrete numbers on screen: Kirstie’s renovation brief is presented as being relatively modest compared with the cost of moving, while Phil’s properties operate at a higher price point, a dynamic reviewers flagged as the source of on‑screen tension and near‑fallout between the hosts over what constitutes “doable” for the family ^{[3] [4]}. Channel 4’s synopsis and multiple TV listings confirm the location, household names and layout complaint ^{[1] [2]}, while critic coverage supplies the extra detail about the Jackton listing and budgetary clash ^[3]. What cannot be asserted from the sources provided is the final choice made by Julia and Simon in the episode or the exact scope and cost breakdown of Kirstie’s planned works; those specifics are not detailed in the available summaries and reviews ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Reading the episode beyond bricks: production choices and critique

The episode plays to the series’ familiar rhythm — sentimental attachment versus practical alternatives — and reviewers note that the pairs and properties Phil shows can sometimes feel “over the top,” a critique the IMDb audience page has made of the franchise generally, which raises questions about how production selects show homes to dramatise the dilemma ^[5]. Audience-facing platforms and broadcasters reiterate the format’s rules: equal budgets tied to moving costs, developer teams implementing Kirstie’s plans, and Phil seeking dream homes, but the extent to which property picks are curated for narrative tension rather than pure market parity is an implicit production agenda visible across the coverage ^{[4] [6]}.