Construction company rejects change requests in construction service description and construction contract

"Oh dear..., we don't want to build with them at all if there are already such discussions and problems from the outset"

Then they should just leave it, there are plenty of other construction companies. I would have every vague description explained to me, preferably in writing. From my own experience, I can say that there are disputes later if there are nebulous formulations. This then ends in legal disputes. An example: I complained about the work or execution plans, which in my case hardly differed from the approval plans, and experts confirmed that these are not such plans. In the correspondence with our lawyer, the opposing lawyer then wrote: "The construction description merely states that detailed "plans" in scales 1:50 and 1:20 will be handed over. How detailed these plans are to be executed is not specifically stipulated." Anything that is not clearly and explicitly described can (and probably will) lead to trouble later. I would not sign the construction contract with the construction company of my choice a second time.

This is indeed regulated by law, see Baugesetzbuch § 632a.

Sorry, but that is of little concern to most. What the OP wants is to adjust the amount of the individual payments. And in almost every contract for work and services, you will hit a brick wall with that.

Most construction contracts unfortunately abound with ineffective clauses.... Legally, these fog contracts are not really needed, because the Construction Code provides a very good and balanced law. If the general contractor now changes this through their nice contract, usually nothing better comes out....

In my opinion, changing the submitted contracts at the customer's request usually does not work. The regular employee at the general contractor does not have an overview of this either and is not allowed to. The general contractor sits it out. And they also have the deeper pockets. Deleting or adding to the contract - e.g., at the end under "Other" - is somewhat more feasible.

The description of the construction services should indeed be as precise as possible. It later defines the performance target.

What is actually decisive is also how the contract is lived. Legally much more significant - especially with real (!) defects, i.e., not minor scratches or the like - is in my opinion the Abnahme, especially because of the reversal of the burden of proof and the potentially serious consequences associated with it. And above all, one must, during the Abnahme according to § 640 II Construction Code, reserve the warranty rights despite the Abnahme so as not to lose them. Otherwise, the recorded defects without such a reservation unfortunately legally go into the void...

Am I actually the only one who doesn't understand the opening thread from sauerpeter? ...except of course the headline, which explains everything, and the first paragraph; everything else reads like a jumbled mess and somehow as if you, sauerpeter, have to persuade the BU to build under his conditions ;)

Be that as it may: if the contracting party has at some point paid a lot of money for the formulations for terms and conditions, construction service descriptions, or the contract for work, they naturally do not want to deviate from these regulations unless they can foresee the possible consequential costs and accept them as minimal for themselves.

Regards

Can you summarize the points that your lawyer doesn’t like so much?

For example, in our case, the brand used was also mentioned in the [Bauleistungsbeschreibung] for sanitary installations.

I just spoke with the construction company; he said 2 to 3 times that it might be better if we look for another company. If there are already problems now, then that is not a good basis. He has been building houses for over 30 years and never had any problems with the construction contract. I currently think it’s not even about the scope of work, because that basically mainly concerns the naming of brands, sizes, etc., and some things that still need to be added or are unclear. Nothing disadvantageous for the construction company. I have the feeling it’s much more about the construction contract. He is not really willing to change it. The construction company has been using it for years and there have never been any problems. He said you can make handshake agreements with him and he stands behind the work of his employees; if there is a problem, he makes sure it is taken care of. In our region, he has a very good reputation and many people recommended him to us. Hhhhm, now we have a meeting in two weeks to clarify things. :( It seems like everything is starting from scratch again...

@ Yvonne: For me, it’s not about pushing through all my demands. Sometimes it’s just about formulations or deleting words because, for example, "essentially free of defects" could become a problem if it comes to that. What does essentially mean? You see, it’s not about pushing through all demands. It was already mentioned above, contract comes from compromise, that’s what the construction company meant on the phone. That is also true and in my interest, but it must also be understood when I want to protect myself or just want some things described in more detail. If a heating system is installed for me, that’s nice, but what kind? Performance? Brand? That wouldn’t actually be a problem to just name, right? If I want an entrance canopy, that’s also nice. But just the statement that an entrance canopy will be built is quite unspecific. Are those now 2 chairs above the door, a simple board from the hardware store, or a canopy in a gable roof shape, with black, engobed roof tiles of brand x and the roof stands on 2 round columns diameter x? That’s something different. That’s actually what it’s about, in regard to the scope of work. It’s clear to me that many construction companies don’t deviate from their contracts. But a compromise on trivial formulations would be possible. If I now come with a contractual penalty of xxxx euros, I understand the construction company’s concerns. Or with a bank guarantee. But when, for example, the building application is to be handed over to us or the construction completion date or construction schedule, these are not things that put the construction company at a disadvantage now.

Still, thanks for all your answers. But feel free to keep writing; it’s quite interesting to see what others think :)