Boundary to the neighbor with garage built over by approximately 1-2 cm

I received a reply from the general contractor today:

[*]The residential building is measured into the plot based on the building permit plans; there is no distance to the boundary shown on any plan in the building permit; therefore, the specification for the boundary distance is the clearance area, which must be strictly observed; the minimum distance according to the clearance area plan is 3.00 meters – this value was adhered to
[*]- The construction plan shows a value of 3.50 m to the boundary; how this value was determined cannot be traced on our side since, as mentioned, there is no boundary distance indicated in the building permit (we can no longer ask Ms. xxx (note: the draftsman) because she is no longer employed by our company)
[*]- One thing is certain – the building corner points were measured based on the building permit; the clearance distance was observed (we cannot verify anything further – this does not constitute a defect (this point was also not recorded in the handover protocol!))
[*]- A final note – at the time of measuring the building corners, no boundary stones were yet in place

Edit: What just occurred to me, the fan of the heat pump now also doesn't have a 3m distance to the neighbor!

In the building permit, the distance to the boundary is not marked on any plan

Funny. He justifies the correctness with a mistake that was made in his company.
BauVorlV
§ 7 Excerpt from the cadastral register, site plan
...
(3) The site plan must, insofar as it is necessary for the assessment of the construction project, include:
...
13. the distances of the planned building structure ... to the neighboring boundaries ...

thus the clearance area serves as the guideline for the boundary distance

Nonsense. There must be a site plan. If no measurement is indicated, the graphical representation must be considered. At what scale is it presented? Are the clearance areas marked? Even if it is 1:1000 and even the clearance areas are missing, a distance greater than 3 m should be recognizable.

The working plan shows a value of 3.50 m to the boundary

The working plan was available before staking out? Then I recommend seeing a specialist lawyer. Then the general contractor even admits with the letter that the 3.50 was documented.

- A note at the end – at the time of measuring the building corners, no boundary stones were present yet

What does he want to say with that? If the other points don’t apply, that he is not to blame because he did not know the location of the boundary? Even the 3 m is not correct. And then also skewed. And 8 cm, if it is true, shows great unprofessionalism. There was sloppy work and now excuses are being sought. I would discuss the liability issue and the chances of enforcement with an expert; the 150€ would be worth it to me.

Hello M4rvin

the guy is not bad. Instead of playing it safe, he wants to fool you.
You should have a clear word with him. You have massive damage (car works, bike doesn’t). And that for your or [dem Hausleben] long.
Maybe he will build the carport at his own expense.

Steven

Since I just got home now, here are a few attachments.
I needed the site plan with measurements for some application and received it from the general contractor. The site plan at a scale of 1:1000 as well as the ground floor elevation were included in the building application.

Is it useful to reply to this email? Or would you go straight to a lawyer?

I mean, yes, I basically have a "damage," but how should this be assessed?

I needed the site plan with survey measurements for some application and got it from the general contractor.

It is important to reconstruct the exact procedure and all facts precisely, so that you do not make any claims which, should there be a court case, can be proven false. Clarify for yourself and write down:
When did I receive the site plan?
On what occasion?

The site plan at a scale of 1:1000

Here you can clearly take the 3.50m. Taking into account the mapping accuracy, the range is between 3.30m and 3.70m. This is reason enough for the person who carried out the staking out to ask precisely again. Certainly no reason to stake out 3m. Was there no plan with the setback areas?

The ground floor view was included in the building application

That would be unusual. It is a 1:50 plan after all. Building submissions are almost always 1:100. Research carefully again.

Is it worth replying to this email? Or would you go straight to a lawyer?

Hard to say. One thing is certain, the email is an impertinence. If you still feel capable of negotiating calmly and factually, you might achieve more than a lawyer. However, the general contractor probably has more experience with such disputes and will just sit it out. Questions for you that might help you and any lawyer you might involve:
What exactly would you realistically wish from the general contractor – after all, he’s no fairy godmother? What would you consider reasonable? How far along is the construction? Are payments still outstanding? If yes, how much? What happens if the general contractor stops his work?

I mean, yes, I basically have a "damages" claim, but how should this be valued?

Only an experienced lawyer can probably answer that for you.