Architect commissions surveyor without the homeowner's consent.

I know the architect game - with the experience from back then, I would gladly pay the 5k today and save my nerves...

The train has already left for you - now lawyer fees etc. are added. In the end, you pay the 18k - you settle with the architect on a lower amount, the rest your lawyer takes from you.

If you don't care about nerves and cash, I would let it come to that now...
Your legal expenses insurance pays - that would be unusual....


GD

Or put differently: shouldn't a surveyor actually be familiar with the city's development plan? Which extension is allowed and which is not?

The surveyor only measures unless something else has been commissioned. He can even create a survey plan from the master data without having been on site. Why is an architect from MVP, who is only authorized to file in MVP, making a plan for you? He could have obtained the filing authorization for your federal state. Besides, as an architect, he would have the duty to check to what extent the extension is approvable. If you commission the architect to approve the plan of your acquaintance, then he can expect from a professional that the conditions for the construction of the extension are met. The examination itself also takes some time and so do three meetings. I can understand your lawyer's effort to reach a settlement. The architect presumably already argues that he received a verbal commission in advance. Is there a protocol from your three meetings? (Only those who write remain) especially if it goes to court. It is obvious that there is collusion here. Unfortunately, you cannot prove it.

I can understand you. My suggestion is to prepare protocols of the 3 meetings. Quote in the negotiation from the protocols. No one can remember exactly what was discussed 2 years ago.

2.) I have not yet signed the contract, but my lawyer says that the architect can represent me even without the signed contract! [...]

2.: Of all people, a lawyer thinks that a power of attorney can be granted to an architect (!) verbally; the joke is terribly bad and in my opinion, the guy is a case for a complaint to his bar association. He probably does his job as "thoroughly" as your cousin does. 3.: At the very least, when forwarding the offer, a fax or registered letter should have been sent indicating that there were apparently different views about your mandate relationship. Here, a still friendly but clear rejection would have been appropriate. 4./5.: You should have responded to the reminder already, also with a protective letter to the responsible dunning court. Instead of the most expensive law firm, you would have been better off with almost any other, because expensive firms are known for their poor work, mostly with employed beginners, and are particularly poorly motivated in disputes over small amounts. A late business friend once told me that if the firm Smith & Wesson doesn’t do the job properly, he goes to their colleagues Heckler & Koch. If you are actually in a position where the burden of proof lies with you (probably because you have let it come to that, being the defendant), then quickly go to a suitable lawyer. You have also made some mistakes that you will no longer be able to undo. Already from the further appointments after you said you wanted to have the contract reviewed, the architect can be considered to have been commissioned implicitly (under the undisputed terms of his contract, which by the way regularly includes the power of attorney clause); even more so by any subsequent acceptance of his services (including forwarding the offer). Neither the architect nor the surveyor has to know your development plan by heart and immediately be able to see if the construction project has no chance of approval. However, finding this out is part of service phase 1 according to HOAI, for which 2/98 of the fee for service phases 1 to 8 is charged. 18k EUR for service phase 1 (in which however commissioning a surveyor can regularly occur) is disproportionate. On the one hand, he has to explain where this fee level comes from – on the other hand, this "must" is a "should" (subjunctive) because you waited until you became the defendant (and counterclaimant, which already "pays off" for the lawyer). This has resulted in a reversal of the burden of proof, which now lies with you. Because as said, the architect has as "evidence" the undisputed contract draft, your further visits, and your silence even after the reminder. If he can prove that you received it, then you are well advised to settle. Was there at least a conciliation hearing? (For such petty matters, hardly any judge goes to the main hearing if it can be avoided).

Hi,
thank you for your comment;)
1.) The protocol for the survey says nothing, it can easily be manipulated... I wanted to know whether the surveyor was supposed to contact me before the alleged survey took place. And I write alleged because I live in the house and did not see the people there. That is why I assume an attempted fraud.

2.) The architect contract was presented to me, but not signed by me. The lawyer still claims that I have to pay the architect;(

3.) I had not signed a contract with the architect; nevertheless, I ended up in court with the surveyor’s invoice because I refused to pay and referred to the architect, who acted prematurely.

4.) I am going to court because I have to pay in the end;) By the way, my lawyer has so far contributed nothing to the matter, I have to provide him with the arguments, otherwise he wants to settle. At the very beginning he told me that I had to pay, even if I do not have a contract with the lawyer;(
I called the architect and communicated with him that the bank did not give approval for the financing. What am I supposed to think of a person who sends me an invoice shortly thereafter? I thought he was mistaken! And when the reminder came, it was clear to me that he wanted to rip me off. After that, I contacted the lawyer and the whole thing took its course.
I’m very sorry that I am emotional, this whole thing affects me deeply!
By the way: criticizing me does not help me! And it is unfair!
It would just be nice to get some proper advice, or simply answers to my questions, instead of many more questions that don’t help.
I chose the most reputable law firm in the area because I cannot read a person’s mind. How am I supposed to know if the lawyer is the right one?

P.S. You don't change horses during the battle! And if a lawyer turns out to be a dressman, then I have to provide him with the feed!