Continuation of construction despite the construction stop

This payment of these 100€ to the building authority does not, however, cure the fact that you built like this, does it? So if the neighbor opposite still complains about it, then the roof overhang may have to go?

Well, before it is decided "this must go," arguments are still being exchanged diligently and, last but not least, it is being checked whether it would even be proportionate.

So usually everything has to fit into the building envelope. The house, the garage, the bay window, the pergola, and the entrance canopy?

How about the heat pump, for example? Some pumps hang on the outside of the house and protrude about 50 cm. Could that be a sticking point? A skeptic might say that the 3 meters are undershot because of the pump. The same could, of course, to really highlight the narrow-mindedness, be said about the gutters hanging on the house wall.

At least in SH the garage/carport is not allowed. It may be on the boundary. The heat pump is also not allowed. The house including the roof overhang and gutter, however, is allowed. The purpose of the regulations is understandable. No one should have something directly next to them that devalues my house. This ensures that there is at least 6m distance between building a and b.

Normally, the building authority thoroughly checks before issuing the building permit whether the rights of third parties could be violated and whether the state building regulations and building code etc. are complied with, and also addresses the arguments of a third party during the hearing phase if necessary. If the building authority then believes everything is okay, the building permit is granted. But authorities can also make mistakes or be wrong. Therefore, a third party can file a lawsuit if they believe their rights have been violated. This lawsuit has no suspensive effect, i.e. construction may continue. BUT: if the court is of the opinion that third party rights have indeed been violated and it is finally determined that there is no possibility of retroactive approval or that the errors cannot be remedied, the client bears the costs of the dismantling themselves. But then it was already clear beforehand that the permit was granted on the edge. There are always troublemakers, and if their arguments hold no weight, they often lose the case. A classic case is the "unobstructed view," if that is gone, tough luck.

This ensures: There is at least 6m distance between building a and b.

This has more to do with fire protection and, of course, also in connection with the floor space index and plot ratio, so that not too much is sealed.