Construction company halts work despite overpayment

Nothing is explained there. The procedure is rather unfair. Collection is done endlessly. Offsetting is not accepted. Funding and liabilities clearly separated

Not at all. Not in this absoluteness. For us, (if they should come up with the idea of issuing an invoice again) offsetting would be possible, in many other cases not. That's what our lawyer says.

He only took on these costs on the dear patient paper. We come from this construction consultation and transfer the 40,000 € on the way and have the obstruction notice dated the day of the consultation in the mailbox the next day. Since the consultation was in the evening from 5:00 to 7:00 pm, it is assumed that he had already written it beforehand. That is more than shady.

It could also be interpreted differently: yes, he apparently already had the obstruction notice ready before the conversation and probably had already sent it, unless it was dropped directly at your place, and of course it would have been fair to inform you about it during the conversation, but at the same time, this also shows that the obstruction notice was apparently sent by him entirely independently of the 40,000 euros or other claims. Because he could not have known that you would make the transfer that same evening and thus could not be sure how you would react regarding this money when you had the obstruction notice in your mailbox the next day.

Once again about the "threatened" insolvency. If it really occurs, there will be no court date, says the lawyer.

I already recommended that you get a second opinion on the litigation strategy from a lawyer experienced in insolvency law. Of course, a company undergoing insolvency proceedings can still be sued; in that case, the administrator is the representative of its assets.

Is it allowed to ask, despite the ongoing proceedings, what currently prevents a settlement for continuing construction?

Primarily, there seems to be a lack of compatibility of the legal positions of the two parties, in other words, no "prospect of hope" for a settlement. At least at the lawyer’s level – an arbitrator or judge could still suggest a settlement.

Primarily, it seems to be a lack of compatibility between the legal positions of the two parties, in other words, a lack of "hope for prospect" of a settlement. At least on a legal level – a mediator or judge could still suggest a settlement.

Yes, but perhaps a new settlement with more realistic positions (full purchase price payment, waiver of default penalty in return for immediate resumption of construction and defect rectification) could quickly aim for a settlement, because otherwise a settlement will only be proposed in court in October, and it will take further months until that is resolved. With a new winter break.

I see it like this: Either stay firm, but then give possession in spring 2021 rather than give in, for possession at the beginning of 2020. One saves a lot of rent, provision costs, legal costs and nerves. The price would be "only" one's own pride and the desire for revenge, which we hopefully have been able to mitigate.

Yes, but maybe one could quickly aim for a settlement with a new agreement with more realistic positions (full purchase price payment, waiver of default penalty in exchange for immediate resumption of construction and defect rectification), because otherwise the settlement will only be proposed in court in October, and it will take several more months until it is settled. With a new winter break.

I see it this way: Either stay tough, but then allow move-in in spring 2021, or give in for move-in at the beginning of 2020. You save a lot of rent, preparation costs, legal costs, and nerves. The price would be "only" one's own pride and desire for revenge, which we hopefully have been able to mitigate.

If the original poster stays tough, there will be no move-in to the house. It may just be my opinion.

When the whole issue is over, no one will dare approach a weathered shell (after all, it has been standing open now for 8 months and who knows how much longer it will remain like that), apart from that, a shell builder has to be found who has empty order books and is willing to take on something like this with less budget than at the beginning.

...a shell constructor with empty order books has to be found who tackles something like this with less budget than initially.

In case of doubt, I would award the rest alone and carry out the matter together with the forum. We are happy to help. :)