Built-in windows do not match the window plan. Objection?

The opening in the masonry for the window is correct; the element 2.26 x 2.135 m can be installed.

Whether this is correct undoubtedly also depends on where the bricklayer left the hole! Both the length, width, and the position of the window opening must match their actual measurements with the target measurements (within permissible tolerances, before anyone brings that up).

1.
Shoddy construction remains shoddy construction – and thus a "defect". Before and after acceptance.

This statement will surely be conducive to peace on the construction site; it will encourage the willingness of the craftsmen to correct errors within the framework of economically reasonable measures. I am just imagining the OP approaching their structural builder/window installer/contract partner with this tone.

As if there were not already enough know-it-alls who deeply unsettle the builders; foremost among them under nicknames or known associations. Many of them must be fundamentally bad at heart to suspect everyone – especially banks + craftsmen – of nothing but evil.

For almost six years, I have been trying to foster understanding for both sides – and again on both sides; that’s the only way it works. By the way, no different than in everyday real life.

Rhineland regards

Hello everyone,

first of all, thank you very much for the many contributions!
I still have to read through page 2!

I have news: Yesterday my grandfather (spry retiree) was at the construction site and spoke with the window installer.
The window installer said under his breath that the shell construction company was to blame because he measured the shell openings according to the dimensions.

It should be noted here that the BT is also the shell constructor with the turnkey construction method.

I contacted the BT again today to see if he has been able to check the discrepancy.

[[[We still had a few minor complaints about the windows.
For example, the left tilt-and-turn window sits higher than the right fixed-glass window element.
Also a few optical defects. Similarly, when opening the tilt-and-turn windows (hours later after the rain shower), water ran out of the lower frame hole onto the shell floor, although in my opinion the water should have drained away. No idea if this is normal, but I don’t want to have to open the window later and watch water run onto the floor.]]]

The answer from the BT was (I should mention that I never used the word “defects”!), “the defects in the windows” will be fixed by the window installer.
Furthermore, the BT is “in contact with the window and roller shutter installer regarding the shifting of the window,” and the BT will get back to us as soon as he knows more!

What was the cause now?
On the window plan, the lower window on the ground floor (both fixed-glass window elements are meant) is drawn larger (= 3.51 m) than this window actually is (= 3.355 m).
That makes a difference of almost 16 cm. That means the middle frame on the ground floor must be shifted half that, i.e. 8 cm, to the left.
The window installer correctly measured the window from the left support to the “chimney wall.” In the planning, the window dimension probably extended over the corner support to the right because the wall openings themselves are correct.
The shell constructor or the BT should have noticed that the window can only be installed up to the left edge of the corner support.
The shell constructor should have then shifted the upper window on the upper floor or the shell opening 8 cm further to the left!
Unfortunately, this was neglected on the upper floor!

I will keep you updated!

I am curious whether the window on the upper floor will be removed and shifted 8 cm to the left.

Of course, one can argue whether the effort justifies the benefit, but of course I paid a lot of money for the windows (aluminum-plastic) and sacrificed a lot of time for my house planning so that the windows are partially symmetrical and harmonious with each other. From inside and outside.
In addition, we have the same windows on the left side on the ground and upper floors. Everything fits there! Of course, not everyone notices that, but as a builder you want to see your plans realized!

Best regards
Manuel

The casus cnactus is obviously that the wall openings were known and presumably also correctly created

and

What was not known and was probably only determined by the window maker or whoever ???? is the width of the corner support. In the remaining ground floor opening, the window was then split again. However, the center point of the two doors shifted further to the right according to the plan (in the view below to the left) due to the widening of the corner support, resulting in this outcome.


What was therefore, in my opinion, missing was the correct calculation of the corner support and THEN the precise planning of the window opening positions.

The question here would be who could have calculated the corner support when and whose responsibility it would have been. Based on the drawings, I would say that something additional would have had to be agreed upon, because the drawing explicitly states that the corner support is calculated according to static analysis. So it could be wider or narrower than depicted.

YES EXACTLY! THAT’S HOW IT IS! However, my construction contract does not yet mention the note "corner support cladding support according to static analysis." This note only appeared in the last work plan.

However, the shell builder should have shifted the upper window to the left – after determining the support – or the work planning should have been "adjusted"?

At the latest, during the construction of the ground floor, it should have become apparent that the upper window no longer fits according to the window plan, since the support was already physically present.

Now one can ask whether the shell builder and their architect should have noticed this discrepancy or whether the appearance or coherence is even decisive after the static analysis has been determined?

At least the coherence of the upper and lower window was drawn in the window plan and the dimensions of the window on the ground floor were later changed (after the construction contract). In my opinion, the client should have been informed about this change.

What is interesting is that there is no actual dimension for the right window (ground floor) to be found!? Only by measuring on the plan. (i.e., the mentioned 3.51m like the left window on the ground floor on the left side of the house elevation). In the work plan, it only says 3.70m.

this is really not very elegant. who does what and why is not the homeowner’s problem in a turnkey house. the contact person is always the construction company you signed with.
using static calculations as a reason here is nonsense, otherwise proof must be provided that this can only be done this way.
in terms of appearance, windows were sold aligned directly above each other here. that’s how it’s done according to the rules of the trade. based on your plan, it can be assumed that it will also be executed this way.

ultimately, all this brings very little, because moving the upper window involves considerable effort. there is a risk that the modification will cause the window to become somewhat leaky, get scratched, etc... even if theoretically you can again report defects/errors, the matter usually does not improve (except, of course, for leaks, no one gets away with that).
the best solution would probably be to talk to the construction company about what they could do now. consider an amount that you would be willing to accept to "overlook" this cosmetic defect. even better and to get much more out of it, you could try to negotiate some extras. because when they do it cheaply for you, they only calculate their actual costs. so an extra that would normally have cost you 1500€ could be covered by a 500€ compensation payment. you just have to find something reasonable that you would like to have.