Cleaning damage on facade – is the developer's response sufficient?

And why you repeatedly advise me to "go to a professional" is beyond me. I can't do that. Obviously, you are not aware of how a WEG works.

Yes, I am aware: a professionally managed WEG has a manager who calls the meeting and draws from his experience why clear instructions must be given to the Schlümpfen. A small WEG is self-managed (i.e., by laypersons) and there, people with peacemaker, agitator, and follower temperaments face each other. They play Mikado, meaning whoever moves has lost and afterwards is branded as the scapegoat by the other two.

Not that I have to justify myself here, but I am in favor of hiring a lawyer. The other owners, however, not necessarily.

I am glad to read that – but then I don’t understand your hesitation.

Accordingly, I need professional arguments to convince them why the statement of the developer is not sufficient. Because he basically wants to repair. Either you can contribute something technical or not.

There is nothing relating to building physics or plastering to add. The problem does not lie in the suitability, limited suitability, or unsuitability of a method of damage repair. Rather in the defendant who does not want to "repair," but to "adjourn, equivocate, and keep in suspense." Without a lawyer and their remedy of missed deadlines and the like, your claim for repair will fail before the developer has committed to a binding remediation plan. Otto Reutter sang about this in 1929 as "the conscientious bricklayer" – its topicality has not diminished.

This is the only professional statement so far

But you didn't ask that. You asked about the content of the BT's statement. Everything else is a remote diagnosis.

A small owners' association is self-managed (i.e., by laypersons), and people with peacemaker, instigator, and follower temperaments face each other. They play Mikado, meaning whoever moves has lost and is later branded as the scapegoat by the other two.

Relevance? We are not self-managed. Unfortunately, there are no highly motivated 5-star service administrations here. If you know one, feel free to recommend it; I have not come across any.

I am glad to read that – however, then I do not understand your hesitation.

I try (emphasis on try) to obtain professional information to support the decision. That is exactly the opposite of "hesitating." An application to open a proof procedure would likely be rejected without any information. Understood?

There is nothing related to building physics or plaster technology to add here. The problem is not the suitability, marginal suitability, or unsuitability of a method for damage repair. But the opponent who does not want to "repair," but rather "postpone, equivocate, and keep it in suspense."

You are wrong here as well. The developer has explicitly and in writing assured that he will repair. Within the warranty period. That is not the issue; rather, it is about whether we want to accept the type of repair or not.

But you did not ask that. You asked about the content of the developer’s statement. Everything else is a remote diagnosis, which does not help you as a resident.

Actually, that is exactly what I asked: What is the content (=technical aspect) of the developer’s statement? And what is the assessment of technically experienced, objective persons regarding the damage? I formulated these questions quite specifically.

One picture alone is not enough to assess the problem. I doubt that this is the only spot where the plaster will flake off in the future. Therefore, it is advised here to properly criticize it. Among other things, with a deadline. In my opinion, this has so far been omitted. Has an expert already been commissioned to assess the damage?

What the GU suggested can work. As a layman, however, I would not trust it. The forum cannot replace the expert. Find a specialist who does this for you. For example, there are often defects at the transition to the basement or to the ground. Window reveals are also often affected. Only a specialist can assess this. Shortly before the 5-year deadline, this should not be left to a forum.