Construction company or tradesmen to assign themselves?

Hello,

..Yes, maybe a "middle ground" is the best alternative. But what would that look like? Do you have everything offered completely and then remove trades afterwards, or do you agree in advance which trades you want to award yourself and have them left out on the offer right away?

"Scaling down" is usually the less favorable way, since the "credits" for removing trades generally occur below market level. There is a reason for that. The contractor has calculated with the complete performance and by removing performance parts, necessary profit is lost. Much better is "scaling up", for example a closed shell construction that is complemented by the missing construction services. Even with these additions, you can still involve the general contractor and only award the sensitive tasks externally. Overall a possibility which is gaining increasing attention for various reasons.

Best regards

Hello €uro,

... Even with these additions, the general contractor can still be involved and only the sensitive matters outsourced.

There he is again, the "€uro"

Kind regards

hi,

so I have now decided to definitely hire a construction expert (independent of the construction company, general contractor, or anything else) for my house construction. This person is supposed to supervise the construction and the trades. It costs a bit more, but they can also create the lists for the individual trades and obtain offers (conduct tendering). I would also feel more comfortable if not everything came from a single source.
Consider this approach. As a subsidy, you have someone who watches the craftsmen closely and recognizes and counteracts shoddy workmanship. I am estimating additional costs of 4000-5000 €. By the way, mine also advises beforehand and reviews offers in advance – that is, before signing.

Regards Bromi

Hello,

well, I have now decided to definitely hire a building surveyor for my house construction (independent of the construction company, general contractor, or anything else).

Good; I would feel much more comfortable if several builders handled it this way

By the way, mine already advises in advance and also checks offers beforehand – that is, before signing.

That is an important starting point for protecting the builders already before signing the contract, which I don’t know how many times I have already recommended here. There are enough contacts nationwide for the evaluation of construction documents, starting with lawyers and ending with genuine building consultations; perhaps your contribution here will raise awareness among potential builders for this approach. Thank you

Kind regards

We are building with the developer company Fa. Drewes, Tülau. The completion date is far overdue. Therefore, my recommendation: In principle, one should protect oneself against time delays through contractual penalties. The opinion that by choosing a developer who can coordinate everything in one hand (could), there would be better cooperation in the construction process, as we have found out, is purely theoretical. And by interposing the developer between the subcontractors, you have one unnecessary level more. The assumption that the developer could calculate cheaper prices due to multiple orders (essentially a "volume discount") is also, in our experience, a nice theory, since this bonus completely disappears in the budget of the developer acting as an intermediary, and the client does not see any of it. Quality work has its price and cannot be pressed down indefinitely by purely quantitative measures. I would advise caution if the calculation of a trade by a developer strongly deviates downward from that of others,... from experience, it cannot be the same quality. For example, with us, a non-DIN-compliant screed foil was installed, and the people who had to attach the battens to the vapor barrier had never heard of the different adhesives, e.g., from the company Siga. The time effort and stress when you want to enforce your claims as a client is, in our experience, made more difficult by the choice of a developer, since this one relies, for example, on fake documents or false statements from the subcontractors that the complaints are unfounded. Some subcontractors of our developer refused to provide us with any information about the amount of additional costs for alternatives during the sample appointments, as they said they were prohibited from doing so by the developer, and would have to expect the withdrawal of further future orders.