Construction company halts work despite overpayment

What legal qualifications do you have to lecture the OP in your two-liners?

None! Only if the lawyer says he should keep his feet still, he should do so. Or find one who lets him do as he pleases.

If one files a complaint, only the fronts harden and it is also a signal to the court about the plaintiff's attitude. At the present time, it can also be an insinuation, as the sequence of events is no longer so clear and unambiguous as to who stopped performing or paying first.

But it is clear. We have paid and the retention was agreed upon and recorded in the meeting minutes. The retention amounted to €7,490. According to the new regulation in the Building Code for construction contracts from 1.1.2018, it would be €24,000 that we would be allowed to withhold, since the contractor did not provide us with a security bond.
[B]§ 650m Baugesetzbuch, Abschlagszahlungen; Absicherung des Vergütungsanspruchs
Paragraph Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch[/B]

(2) The consumer must provide security at the time of the first partial payment for the timely completion of the work without significant defects in the amount of 5 percent of the agreed total remuneration. If the remuneration claim increases by more than 10 percent as a result of an order by the consumer according to §§ 650b and 650c or due to other changes or additions to the contract, the consumer must provide further security in the amount of 5 percent of the additional remuneration claim at the next partial payment. At the entrepreneur’s request, the security is to be provided by withholding partial payments in such a way that the consumer retains the partial payments up to the total amount of the owed security.

You can believe me that I am not writing anything here that I cannot prove. And if everyone “keeps their feet still” all the time, there is no need to be surprised that nothing happens and that there are construction sites like ours.

Watching how he makes a mockery of things with our money and his new company?

To what extent does publicly exposing and discrediting the other party and forming coalitions bring you closer to your goal, whatever that may be (getting your money back? finishing the build?)? Your lawyer is right, you are not exactly behaving wisely here. The courts are well aware of the conflict stages according to Glasl. Destroying the "opponent" at the cost of self-destruction surely cannot be the goal.

New regulation in the Building Code for construction contracts

Has your lawyer understood that? According to 2.2 of your contract, there is a hierarchy of contractual bases, and since the Building Code is obviously listed last. I would interpret that the defect retention according to the Building Code only applies if there are no provisions on this in the previously listed set of rules.

No, it definitely isn't. I just foolishly still believe in justice.

I can somewhat understand your lawyer, because in court you also depend on the goodwill of the opposing side. If you now attack your BU from yet another side, it will surely become completely stubborn.

This does not mean that you cannot exchange with other affected parties, but at first only in secret.