building without execution planning from the architect

hello everyone,

for the single-family house construction - a completely standard house "off the shelf," type city villa, 150 sqm without basement, 2 floors, KfW70, ) we have a contractor (through him a structural engineer and energy saving ordinance engineer) and an independent architect.

with the architect, phases 1 to including phase 5 (execution planning) are initially agreed.

with the contractor, a fixed-price contract and construction service description with a fixed deadline have been established, meaning we have defined and documented every item down to the smallest detail, lots of effort and several meetings with the general contractor and architect behind us, so from my point of view the house "only" needs to be built now....

now my general contractor says he sees no need to create the execution planning because the approval plans are sufficient for him. sounds tempting for cost savings (the architect would also not insist on creating the execution planning phase 5, so overall he would be cheaper than planned.)

question:
- if a general contractor makes such a statement and is willing to take on the construction project without execution planning, and the fixed-price contract and construction service description have been checked and are consistent, then although the architect does not bear liability, the general contractor is fully liable for any later arising errors or construction defects, right? he cannot retroactively say he did not have the execution planning, therefore the error, right?

then what is the actual benefit of the additional effort for execution planning in such a standard off-the-shelf project (single-family house)?

please share your reasoned (!) opinions and legal position on the allocation of responsibility in such a constellation! please don't just say "execution planning has to be there and that's it," because there are many builders who build without execution planning (calculated risk YES) and still do not end up bearing the costs in case of defects...

perhaps a sentence or two to this effect should be separately included in the contract?

thanks in advance!!!
Heidi

Hi,

Please describe your reasoned (!) opinions and legal situation regarding the allocation of responsibilities in such a constellation! [..]
Perhaps one or the other sentence on the contract for work should be added separately???

Is this an open call for free legal advice?

The question actually belongs in the hands of a legal advisor... especially if it is supposed to involve reliable and liable statements.

thanks to , very helpful, I would never have come up with that on my own. I would like to ask to really refrain from such posts. thanks again

I don't like the tone of the question and even less the reaction to the answer from irgendwoabaier. In this forum, there are (often extensive) support offers for those who have a problem or one / many questions. With such a snappy tone, I personally first have to gag, then the hairs on my neck stand up, and then it yells inside me: "no".

I would think about it. I can't imagine that useful answers will come here now (but masochists exist everywhere).

My honest, constructive answer: In view of the risk in question (easily several 10k euros), and on the other hand the fairly limited consulting effort (50€? 100€ for a one-time consultation), I would go to a lawyer with the question.

Irgendwoabaier is unfortunately right, corumbiko, as much as it pains me. It is a specific legal question and belongs in the hands of a lawyer. Legal advice in a specifically mentioned case simply cannot be given by just anyone.