Construction progress: Duplex with WU basement and developed attic

I strongly doubt that this number is in the single digits. Insurance companies do not offer legal protection insurance for new buildings without reason.

Then you are misinformed. Of course, there are builder's legal protection insurances. ÖRAG, for example, has a coverage amount of €100,000. With us, it would cost €520 per year for 5 years.

Look I do not doubt at all that you have had bad experiences. As I wrote, our own situation is also highly annoying in a different way, which is why I can imagine the feeling of disappointment, being lied to, etc.
However, a discussion with you quickly drifts into attacks and accusations, which I generally find unfortunate.

I had written:

that could maybe also be due to your perception.

You then quote me like this:

But that is probably due to my disturbed perception and my paranoia, as mentioned here in the forum ;) .

I did not write about a "disturbed" perception but expressed that you, like everyone else, maybe have a different perception.
Different does not mean disturbed to me, otherwise everyone would be disturbed because they are different.

So how is it with your own love of truth? Do you take it less exactly the other way round, as here?
Clearly visible to everyone, you have consciously or unconsciously quoted me incorrectly here; with your often rather harsh choice of words I would have to say: you simply lied! (see quote).

But does that necessarily make you a habitual liar to me? No!
Regarding my statements, however, in this case you make yourself the victim of a non-existent attack by juggling the truth and inventing words. This maybe not intentionally or in the heat of the moment but it nevertheless remains an unpleasant untruth spread by you, probably to give more weight to your arguments.
That is unnecessary, unfair and at least raises concerns about further exaggerations or distortions, which you yourself fuel with such a demonstrable misrepresentation.
And...... I also did not write "paranoia," that too stems from your imagination unless you show me my quote with the same wording.

I would also first file a lawsuit and then there will be expert reports anyway ... nothing really changes on the construction status until then that one could more or less see, so I am also in favor of waiting ...

We are still building. More and more defects disappear daily. which is of course good, but not in terms of evidence.

Look I do not at all doubt that you have had bad experiences. As I wrote, our own situation is also extremely annoying in a different way, which is why I can imagine the feeling of disappointment, being lied to, etc. However, a discussion with you quickly drifts into attacks and accusations, which I basically find unfortunate.

I had written:
You then quote me like this:

I did not write about a "disturbed" perception but expressed that you, like everyone else, perhaps have a different perception.
Different does not mean disturbed to me, otherwise all people would be disturbed because they are different.

So how is it now with your own love of truth? Do you take it the other way around, as here, not quite so strictly?
For everyone to see, you have here consciously or unconsciously misquoted me; with your often rather harsh choice of words I would have to say: you simply lied! (see quote).

But does that necessarily make you a habitual liar to me? No!
With regard to my statements, however, you make yourself the victim of a non-existent attack by juggling with the truth and freely inventing words. Perhaps not intentionally or in the heat of the moment, but it remains an unpleasant untruth you spread, probably to give more weight to your arguments.
That is unnecessary, unfair and at least awakens fears of further exaggerations or distortions that you yourself fuel with such a proven misrepresentation.
And......"paranoia" I also did not write, that too comes from your imagination, unless you show me my identical quote.

I did not quote you in the mentioned post, or do you see a quote or quotation marks there? I wrote: "But this is probably due to my disturbed perception and my paranoia, as mentioned here in the forum ;) . " When quoting someone, the author should be named in my opinion. And paranoia and paranoia, I quote you
"Also here best to once switch the paranoia button OFF.......", are the same to me.
Now to call me a liar, no words!

Correction: And paranoia and fear of persecution ................

Well..... then you have just presented it differently than I wrote AND meant it, but definitely not correctly. In the matter, I still understand your annoyance, but in my opinion, the sharpness or polarization that often occurs in your thread also has to do with your way of dealing with things, at least concerning me. Everyone, including you, has formative parts in such events, at least that is my position and my truth, and we probably think differently about that. I find your representation of this incorrect, and I do have the right to feel differently about it than you, don’t I? It is clear that YOU have "named" something incorrectly in connection with me. So there are at least two truths, yours and mine. Which one is the "right" one? Anyone who wants can read up on it. What I always find sad is that the matter gets lost in all this, because in the matter I am by no means your opponent, but rather a "fellow sufferer," and in the end we stand our ground against each other, although we largely agree on the matter. Isn’t that strange or at least unnecessary, I ask myself.....