No Time-Based Review — Event-Driven Reconsideration Only
Annual, seasonal, and calendar-based housing reviews are explicitly excluded. The question 'should we move?' is revisited only when a trigger (C5-018) fires. Scheduled reviews create artificial reconsideration: they produce emotional churn, maintain passive anxiety, and reliably arrive at the same answer as the previous review. The trigger structure provides sufficient coverage — if something real changes, it will be noticed without a scheduled review. Life events (child launch, etc.) are already captured in the family demand trigger and do not require a separate calendar gate.
Capture
Annual, seasonal, and calendar-based housing reviews are explicitly excluded. The question "should we move?" is not revisited on a schedule. It is revisited only when a trigger defined in C5-018 fires.
Why
Scheduled reviews create artificial reconsideration. A review is productive when new information warrants it. A review on a calendar cycle produces the same result as the previous one, because nothing real has changed to change the answer. The only output is emotional churn and re-opened questions that were already closed.
The current home already works. The case for a time-based review assumes the current situation is degrading or that better information accumulates with time on a regular schedule. Neither is true here. The home satisfies the family's needs. The household situation is expected to improve as children age. Time is not the information source — events are.
Passive anxiety is a cost. Maintaining a "check back in a year" posture means the question is never fully closed. It means spring listings create a semi-automatic pull. It means every year produces a brief evaluation loop that reliably arrives at the same answer. That loop has a real cost in attention and emotional energy, and it produces nothing of value.
The trigger structure (C5-018) provides sufficient coverage. If the family's situation changes materially — financially, in family demand, or in the market — the trigger fires without needing a scheduled review to notice it. The triggers are defined to catch the changes that matter. A time-based review would add no additional coverage.
Why-Not
Why not keep a light annual check-in to make sure nothing has changed? A light check-in is not light. It reopens the question in the family's mental accounting, invites spring market browsing, and maintains a low-level anxiety that the decision is provisional. The correct alternative is to trust the trigger structure: if something real changes, it will be noticed without a scheduled review.
Why not use an annual review to update the financial picture? The financial picture updates continuously through normal awareness. The trigger in C5-018 specifically accounts for the financial step-change threshold. A separate annual review adds nothing to that accounting except an artificial decision point.
Why not schedule a review at a specific life event — e.g., the oldest child's high school graduation? Life events are already captured in the family demand trigger (C5-018). If the launch of a child materially changes the household's fit with the current home, that is a triggering event — not because it falls on a calendar, but because it produces a real change in the family demand signal. The trigger structure handles this without a separate review gate.
Commit
Decision: No scheduled housing reviews. Reconsideration is triggered by events (C5-018), not by time. This applies permanently.
Confidence: High.
Timestamp
2026-04-26