Base plate built 20cm too high

And you moved in anyway (so you accepted the defective building). Did you raise any objections regarding the defect?

Since the defect was not immediately apparent, it is not automatically tolerated.

Well, in case of doubt, a court must decide. If there was a surveyed street, one could possibly have recognized 20cm. But that doesn’t help now.

So really mistakes or miscommunication?

The only thing that comes to mind is the song "20 cm never in life smaller Peter"

Hello!

Such a change/height difference cannot be recognized by a layperson, let alone with the naked eye. The defect is also practically hardly quantifiable as such, as long as no further building code consequences arise (e.g. exceeding an absolute maximum ridge height, setback areas, etc.), whereby I initially assume that these do not occur.

That houses are shifted in height – for quite understandable reasons – happens every day. As long as this happens within the specifications of the development plan (B-Plan), it at most results in an amendment request of the building application, which is usually a formality. In fact, this does not even become apparent at the final inspection if it is not an obvious discrepancy. 20 cm are not enough for that, or someone has to actively complain or insist on a re-inspection.

As long as no one does so (justifiably) and the wastewater and rainwater run into the sewer, no real defect arises.

What can therefore (subject to and without knowledge of the exact specifications of the B-Plan) presumably at most threaten here is a subsequent amendment of the building application in case of non-acceptance of the building as well as the costs for the adjustment of the paving, i.e. L-stones including substructure, etc.

The proof that construction deviated from the plan can be provided relatively easily and has obviously already been done by surveyors or the like.

I would only involve a lawyer here if the company responsible for the paving refuses in writing. Until then, I would withhold the €10,000 and only pay it out when the paving is corrected/approved and the building acceptance is complete.

From my point of view, the company can do relatively little against this, since the proof that construction deviated from the building application exists and, on the other hand, the adjustment of the paving is possible. If nothing happens permanently, deadlines should be set, because at some point the service can be commissioned externally and this can then be settled from the withholding – but only with at least legal advice.

Alternatively, the paving can also simply be ordered independently; then it is done and you only have to argue with the construction company afterward about how much you can get out of the €10,000. But then the paving is finished and you "only" argue about money.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

I think that such sloppiness of the type "correct measure in the wrong place" (such as confusing the height of the raw floor / finished floor) are not uncommon; in this case, I suspect that the bottom edge of the floor slab was cast where actually its top edge should have been. These are probably relatively "classic" errors. Adjusting 20 cm over 8 m unfortunately no longer "visually disappears" so easily.

It is clearly referred to as the finished floor level in the BA. We did not measure the OKRD ourselves at that time.

During the acceptance of the house, we naturally did not have the technical means to just measure the finished floor level "on the spot." We have just moved in and want to follow up on the paving while we live there.

The measurements we made afterward (see thread opening) are correct, and we should assume this here.

The resulting defect is now of course the strong height difference over a few meters. The company's short-term commitment to compensate for this at their expense has not materialized for 4 months, as no one at the company feels able to respond to me.

Currently, the situation is as described by Dirk Grafe, that we withhold the money and continue to insist on rectifying the height difference (additional effort and material, extra costs for gravel, joints are not made deep enough, etc.).

So I have understood correctly that I only have legal options left, or until then withhold the €10,000 (which, by the way, I can only transfer to one account).

Really annoying, the whole thing.