Building authority wants site inspection

And then there are other laws, regulations, and court rulings that the building authority does not have to invoke if it can be resolved in an on-site appointment in the interest of all parties involved.

If you insist on your right, which is your good right, then the building authority will also insist on its right and encourage you to comply with all the other laws, if necessary with all available legal remedies.

Go ahead, it is your good right. Whether that is good and sensible, I don't think so. Your decision.

"Temporär" = 4 years?

There are not only basic rights, but also duties.

Meaningful options were mentioned to you.

I also consider that somewhat childish ...

Hello Dirk

the article is fine.

For an April Fool's joke, you're a bit late.

Get used to the idea that the office will come onto your property whether you want it or not. The sooner you accept this thought, the cheaper it will be.

Regards
Dirk Grafe

Hello

Of course, I am trying to gain some time with reasonable arguments.
Why some here find it childish when the authority is demanded to consider fundamental rights is beyond me.
I have something to hide - my privacy.
And why a decision cannot be made based on the files here is also beyond me.
Well, I have explained the facts. I would still be grateful for tips.

Steven

You are probably one of 100 who prefer a decision based on the files. I see the on-site appointment more as an offer to present the supposedly complex matter on the living object. For your benefit, of course.

In this respect, my advice is to consult a lawyer to clarify the "what if." Then inform the office of the reasons for the delay and assure the correction during the course of the year. But leave the [Grundgesetz] out, you’ll only end up in the aluminum foil hat category. Like using cannons to shoot sparrows and such.

Why some here consider it childish when the authority demands to consider fundamental rights is beyond me. I have something to hide - my privacy. And why a decision cannot be made based on the files is also beyond me. Well, I have explained the situation. I would still be grateful for tips. Steven

The situation is completely clear: this cannot be decided based on the files, therefore an on-site appointment will be scheduled by administrative act (google what that is if interested), which you must tolerate even after evaluation/consideration of Art. 13GG. The intrusion into your privacy is minimal, the legitimate interest of the state (e.g. lack of fire protection, violation of building and neighbor law) will certainly be weighed higher here. Therefore, the caseworker comes onto your property, cleans their shoes nicely beforehand, takes 5 photos, and then leaves. Waving around Art. 13GG about such a triviality fits the "legal understanding" of the Reich citizens, alternatively tin foil hat or belated April Fool’s joke - as already described.

One should eventually understand this or ... it will get expensive. Ultimately your decision.

This whole thing also reminds me of a real case from my trainee days, when we once watched a morning live at the administrative court. There an admittedly older and somewhat daft lady claimed she only needed a lawyer and her "privacy" as a basis for argument to keep the district chimney sweep away from her chimney. The judge clearly enjoyed himself; he dealt with the matter in less than 15 minutes. Appeal/revision not allowed, costs borne by the plaintiff, thank you very much, have a nice day, next please.

Regards Dirk Grafe