Contractual penalty in the Building Code contract - new construction

Those who believe that should take a closer look at the term "price-performance ratio." Because it is usually not the case that the customer buys a Polo and expects a Rolls Royce. Only a very small portion unfortunately does not understand that; however, in the forums, the impression arises that almost everyone is like that...

Apart from that, the layperson often cannot assess quality at all. How often have there already been blind tastings where the hobby restaurant critic could not distinguish a 50 EUR rosé from the tetrapack white wine from Aldi...

The contractual penalty should be agreed upon so that it really hurts. Of course, it must cover any costs incurred by the client + x. Maybe next time in construction.

The contractual penalty should be agreed upon so that it really hurts. Of course, it must cover any costs incurred by the client + x. Maybe for the next construction then.

By the way, you are not "powerful" enough for penalties of this magnitude. Maybe a VW or a BASF can get that into their contracts with contractors, but certainly not Willi Wutz, one of dozens of clients currently building with your general contractor...

That is the problem, and it leads to the penalties in the standard contract of the general contractor having to be "appropriate". If a lawyer were to significantly tighten them and the general contractor would accept that, I would even read that as an indication that a complete fulfillment of the contract is not seriously intended (because fraudsters are very generous with promises they do not keep).

It is true that I am frustrated, but it is certainly not about the money. Rather about the poor price-performance ratio of my house.

That means you signed at a non-discount price and the poor fulfillment is now showing in the work (because you could have noticed it in the material selection in the construction performance description)?