After acceptance - Craftsman causes damage without appointment arrangement

Hello,

what is your opinion on the following matter: A house acceptance took place a few weeks ago, making the builders now homeowners. A few weeks later, a defect in the sanitary area is noticed (the silicone joint at the toilet has formed bubbles). The general contractor (GU) is requested to fix the defect, after which he informs that he has notified the sanitary company.

It has now become known that a sanitary employee - without prior consultation and approval from the homeowners - entered the house to remove the silicone joint. He did this early in the morning at a time when no other craftsmen were in the house (others were still commissioned for external work). After his work, he informed the next arriving craftsman that he had noticed cracks in the tiles directly in the area of the toilet holder, where he removed the silicone joint, which of course he did not cause. These cracks were not present the previous evening.

It comes down to the fact that the sanitary company commissioned by the GU will insist that the cracks were already present before their employee performed his work.
1. This cannot be the case, as he was the first craftsman on site that day, and 2. the homeowners never authorized the craftsman to independently enter the house whenever he wanted and perform work. The original notice to the GU was limited solely to the legally required notification of a defect determination, connected with the request to remedy the defect at a certain time X.

The sanitary craftsman was able to enter the house because it is currently equipped with a provisional construction door for which the craftsmen and the GU still have keys.

The final invoice to the GU is theoretically still outstanding, where money might possibly be withheld.

What would you do in the homeowners’ place?

Acceptance has taken place, i.e. the transfer of risk has occurred. After that, damage occurs, the party responsible does not report themselves, the rest is speculation on your part without evidence.

I think you have zero chance.

An inspection while the construction door is still in place is pretty strange though :-)

I don't understand why someone hands over a house and then gives keys to all the tradesmen colleagues. The rushed house handover is probably because of the [märchensteuer]. Otherwise, the burden of proof is on you as long as you don't live there. If dozens of people have proven access, I would be quite relaxed as a tradesman. Maybe it was [Elektro-Willi] or [Fliesen-Otto] who caused the damage. [Sanitär-Toni] won't take responsibility for that. Is the damage really that significant?

You had also inquired here in the relevant threads about the pros/cons of early acceptance of a progress report. I personally wanted to avoid these discussions and therefore refrained from accepting the shell construction with us. For me, this will have been the right decision.

If it is "only" a few cracks with you, the overall bill will still turn out very positive for you.

Hi,
I also think it will be difficult to prove anything there.
However:
How did he determine the cracks?
If it’s at the brackets, did he remove the toilet?
Then it was probably a hidden defect that you couldn’t see during acceptance.
So the general contractor would be responsible.
And if it’s not visible, no matter – you saved a lot of VAT for that.
Regards, Olli