Construction progress: Duplex with WU basement and developed attic

Due to several inquiries, I will try to provide a summary of the construction progress so far:

Purchase of the plot in 2013

Signing of the construction contract with GU1 from the Leipzig surroundings: 16.05.2018

Semi-detached house with WU basement and finished attic

Basement: 200 sqm living space. Both semi-detached halves together just under 400 sqm

no own contributions, without painting and flooring, except tiles

guaranteed fixed lump sum price: €490,000

The plan was for my daughter and her family to move into one side of the semi-detached house and my son with his partner on the other side

In contact with GU1 since 2015, also visited several houses built by him and spoke with the builders, no major problems

Construction start: 08.10.2018

Basement excavation 1,200 m³ soil, disposal costs: €18,000 extra

later it was found that at least 500 m³ were removed unnecessarily, which were hauled back free of charge, but no reimbursement of disposal costs. It was claimed that I had wanted the removal even though I cried after every truck.

Several visits by BG Bau and imposition of a two-time construction halt because the excavation did not have the required slope, thereafter a huge construction pit was excavated, which completely sacrificed the already paid construction road.

After the completion of the ground floor (international masonry brigade without authorization for concrete and masonry work), an email arrived stating that due to static requirements, additional costs of €1,000 would be incurred. We accepted that. One day later, a new email came saying that Mr. GU had miscalculated because he forgot a beam and it was now over €6,000. We then disagreed, referring to the "guaranteed fixed lump sum price."

At the same time, it became apparent that the entire house protruded at least 12 cm higher out of the ground than planned, which was visible due to the light shafts suspended in the air, which were actually supposed to be integrated into the future parking spaces. This was initially vehemently denied. Another point was the filling and compaction of the excavation pit. According to the soil report (which the GU had), the excavation material was not suitable for refilling as it was not compactable. Nevertheless, it was used and not even compacted. This resulted in the ground giving way and the scaffolding leaning against the shell construction. Furthermore, our basement was larger than planned, which in itself would not have been bad if the ground floor above had been adjusted accordingly. The design initially did not provide for external insulation at the basement. However, at contract signing there was supposed to be 10 cm. This was apparently not passed on to the planner. Contract signing including external insulation 16.05.2018, planning documents apparently without external insulation: 18.06.2018?????

After pouring the ground floor ceiling in December, work stopped = construction stop imposed by the GU. Meanwhile, I had engaged an external construction consultant. On 17.12.2018 crisis meeting in GU’s office. At this time the invoice for the ceiling amounting to €47,500 had not been paid yet. We agreed on immediate transfer of €40,000 to the GU and withholding €7,500 until defect clarification under the condition that work would continue from calendar week 2.

Instead of continuation, all equipment and materials were removed in calendar week 2, and the scaffolding was dismantled by the end of January. The GU was unreachable. My construction consultant recommended a lawyer who then filed a lawsuit for continuation of construction in March.

In the meantime, we had commissioned an expert to determine defects, who identified defects amounting to €31,000. Thus, the GU was significantly overpaid.

From May 2018, various settlement offers went back and forth without agreement.

When in July I found out by internet research that Mr. GU had founded a second construction company, I was at my wit's end because I realized what this was heading toward. I was so desperate at some point that I called the GU’s wife (a phone number was given to me by another victim who still plays a special role here; let’s call him Mr. X) and asked her to influence her husband. She said she knew nothing about any of this. Less than 10 minutes later, I received a call from my lawyer that the GU’s lawyer had complained to him. Shortly thereafter I received a cease and desist claim and was supposed to pay €1,000. My lawyer said he could not represent me in that matter. Mr. X (as said, another victim, but not as a builder, rather as a contractor) then put me in touch with his lawyer who got me out of that situation very well.

The trial date was set for 04.10.2019. One week before, the GU entered into a settlement with us, in which we actually came out quite well. He had to pay the court and lawyer fees (totaling nearly €30,000) and damages (about €17,000). We only had to cover the settlement costs. By the settlement, he committed to completing the house by 30.11.2019. However, this date was totally unrealistic. Apart from the fact that he only resumed construction in mid-October. After the roof truss was put on (it was by then end of November and we were still miles away from completion), work stopped again.

Everything went through the lawyers again. In December 2019 he then had the foil put on the roof, which was his last official act. We once again had the expert come who found further defects. Among other things, the concrete walls of the overhanging basement had been chiseled back to the reinforcement so that the rebar was partially visible. In one semi-detached half, a room door was completely forgotten on the upper floor. Supporting pillars were missing, masonry was incomplete and defective, etc.

A joint site meeting between the lawyers was agreed for early January 2020. Who did not show up was the GU. His lawyer informed us that he had sold his company as of 30.12.2019 and our claims would be transferred to the successor company. As it turned out later, this was a mailbox company. He thus buried his first GmbH and we ended up with the short end of the stick.

In February, the judicial enforcement of the settlement came, awarding us €130,000, which GU1 was supposed to pay us as an advance because he had not complied with the settlement. Nice. Only that the document is now worth nothing at all.

Through our lawyer we learned that GU had already been discharged as managing director by shareholder resolution at the end of May 2019. This raises the question for me: why could he enter into a judicial settlement with us in September? Why could he issue invoices to us in October and November 2019 and sign them as managing director? After receiving this information, I reported him for fraud, but these processes are known to proceed slowly. Since the mailbox company does not exist, we now also have to pay the court’s fee assessment for enforcement.

To be continued.

Wow, what a horror story. Thanks for (re)sharing. I’m curious to see how it continues and hope that everything ends as positively as possible for you.

Unbelievable. Oh dear, you already started in 2018 ??? And your family still doesn’t live in it? Strangely, I also had the issue with more reinforcing steel and extra cost in the basement. The expert noticed that and from then on was already on board. I’m curious about the continuation.

Just you wait, it will get even better.

The aforementioned Mr. X offered me his support. However, not selflessly, as he wanted to use me to harm GU1. Apparently, he had an even greater interest in this than I did. He suggested things to me that were really inappropriate, and I rejected them.

At the end of January 2020, I handed over the completion of the shell construction to him. Before awarding my contract, he confirmed to me that the scaffolding would remain in place without further costs for us until the end of the overall construction period. After a week, only the scaffolding was standing and the windows on the ground floor were covered with tarps. His employees usually came in groups of five, and I had the impression they were from the rehabilitation center. They were on the construction site from 10:00, sometimes only 11:00, until 13:00 or 14:00, and you could have literally resoled their shoes while they were walking. I, fool that I am, even delivered coffee, which was going to cost me dearly. The billing was done on an hourly basis, and when I received the first partial invoice on Friday, I was almost shocked: 130 hours = €7,658. This amount consisted of travel time to and from and about 3 hours on the construction site, including coffee breaks. So the two quarter-hour coffee and cigarette breaks per day were to cost me €140 per day, €700 per week!

Here are again my comments on the hourly invoices and his in red:
Tue, 28.01.2020: According to the construction site report: 5 employees from 8:00 to 14:00
I was on the construction site shortly after 10:00 to unlock the power box; at that time, their employees were still unloading the vehicle. Around 11:30, I brought coffee to the construction site. Shortly after, it started pouring rain, so work had to be stopped completely. I left shortly after 12:00; their employees were packing up. Therefore, a pure working time of a maximum of 2 hours per employee should be assumed (presence – (rain break + coffee/cigarette breaks)).

Explanation from Mr. X: According to our records, the colleagues left the company premises around 8:24 and were not back until 14:03. Early preparation also includes site assignment and explanation of the work in the company, as well as material procurement.

Wed, 29.01.2020 according to the construction site report: 5 employees from 7:30 to 15:00
I was on the construction site shortly before 11:00, and no one was there. After consulting with you, the colleagues were on-site at 10:59. 7:30 to 11:00 results in a difference of 3.5 hours multiplied by 5 employees. This cannot be justified by scaffolding loading either. Explanation from Mr. X: At this point, I suggest you load a vehicle yourself.
Also, no one was there at 14:00. Explanation from Mr. X: That is an accusation.
Assuming a few smaller (smoking) breaks, this results in a working time of a maximum of 2.5 hours per employee on site, which is completely ineffective.

Thu, 30.01.2020 according to the construction site report: 5 employees from 8:00 to 15:00
Performed work according to construction site report: scaffolding loaded and erected. Here too, the listed number of hours does not correspond with the working time on the construction site.
Explanation from Mr. X: Why not? According to our GPS records, our employees were loading scaffolding parts at our construction yard from 8:00 and were on the road for you from 9:28 to 15:37.

The scaffolding was still being assembled on Friday. That is the third scaffolding put up on this house; the previous two were each erected within 2x 0.5 working days and dismantled again in about 4 hours. I want to say that something is completely getting out of hand here, and unrealistic hours are piling up. We would have gladly covered the windows with foil ourselves. I assume the young man is an apprentice, as he obviously struggled with handling the drill. In this case, we have another problem with the hourly billing rate. Explanation from Mr. X: We do not have that here, since an hourly billing rate would also apply to apprentices in this case.

I called Mr. X, but he had just gone on vacation and was unreachable. I informed his secretary that work would be stopped until further notice.

Oh, I almost forgot that they also installed a construction door. However, it was locked, and no one knew where the key was. So I had to climb into the upper floor via the scaffolding to get into the house at all. The windows downstairs were covered with foil.

During Mr. X's vacation, there was a storm. It shredded all the window tarps, and because the scaffolding was not properly screwed together, a scaffolding ladder hit the roof foil and left a gaping tear.

When Mr. X returned from vacation, we met in his office. I had probably taken one too many tranquilizers (my husband had driven me), anyway, I was not feeling well but still followed everything; however, it must have made a different impression. In the conversation, he explained, among other things, that he would not allow the scaffolding to be used by third parties and would dismantle it again if he were not also commissioned with the roof covering. This was, however, never up for discussion, as he had not even submitted an offer for it, and it did not correspond to our agreement.

The next day, I received an email from Mr. X: Many heartfelt thanks again for the quick appointment yesterday afternoon. Since you were physically unable to follow all my explanations yesterday, here is a summary of the appointment.

To be continued.

My response to this was:
Extraordinary Termination Replacement Performance Mason

Dear Mr. X,
even though it didn’t seem like it, I was very much able to follow your statements on Monday both mentally and physically. You were aware that I was not feeling well and only attended the appointment at your insistence.

If you believe that you have acted as a consultant for us and want to charge us for this, I can only tell you that you had no mandate for this and it lacks any basis. You acted out of your own interest, as you obviously harbor a much stronger grudge against Mr. …... than I do. You used the situation to your advantage by finding me as someone you could exploit in this matter and constantly targeted …… From whom else did I get information about Ms. ….’s workplace or that one can buy, for example, unregistered prepaid cards in …....... to make anonymous phone calls to harm the entire family ….., just to name a part of your suggestions. What I found extremely disturbing was that you wanted to involve the children of the family. Surely, you will deny this now, but at times I was so shocked that I told Mr......... (construction advisor) about your strange proposals, who will certainly testify to this if it should come to that.

This is not a regular termination but an extraordinary termination based on your breach of contract regarding the scaffolding provision. Before awarding you the contract, you confirmed that the scaffolding would remain in place until the end of the overall construction period at no additional cost to us. Now you have declared that you will not allow the scaffolding to be used by third parties and will dismantle it again.

At no time was it agreed that the scaffolding may only be used by your company. You were aware that due to the remaining budget available, we were forced to consider cheaper offers than those available. The scaffolding provision was never linked to the commissioning of the roofing work by your company. Therefore, the erection is useless to us and remuneration is out of the question.

Furthermore, the performed tasks—scaffolding provision, sealing windows with foil, and installing the construction door—do not meet the requirements. The foil on the windows was torn or cut too short; the bricks placed on the foil for weighting purposes fell off due to the storm onto the underlying light wells, causing damage to the plastic parts. The scaffolding was not secured properly (you yourself told me that some metal parts were missing), so that parts detached during the storm, fell onto the roof truss, and damaged the roofing membrane.

Regarding the construction door, your employees told me on Wednesday that they did not have a key, but I assumed it would be brought the next day and not that it would vanish without a trace.

I have already informed you several times that we do not agree with the hours charged. We also did not “both agree” but you tried to make your point clear to me, which I still cannot understand, but that no longer matters as the remaining foil was removed by your employees on Wednesday and the construction door was dismantled again; therefore, payment for these works is out of the question.

All other work became useless and caused more harm than benefit after your refusal to leave the scaffolding in place until the end of construction as agreed.

Feel free, as you already said, to take legal action, but then other matters will also come to light.

That was the end of February 2020. Then there was silence in this matter until mid-May when I received mail from his lawyer. He demanded that I accept the services of his client and pay the invoice amount.

I responded briefly and concisely:

Referring to your letter dated 14.05.2020, I inform you that we will not declare acceptance of the work performance of your client and hereby oppose it.

What exactly should we have accepted or taken into use???

The scaffolding dismantled by your client? The window foils that were worn out after 4 days and removed by your client? Or the locked construction door for which there was no key?
There is no claim for remuneration by your client.

We should rather come to an agreement about the damages your client has left on our building, such as the roofing membrane damaged by improperly secured scaffolding parts, damage to two light wells, as well as damaged masonry caused during the removal of the boards that held the foil.

After that, there was no response. It would have been difficult for the lawyer anyway, since I was also his client’s (due to the phone call with the wife of the general contractor), and he could hardly have sued me.

To be continued.