Cost estimate - contract for work

The architect is both construction manager and planner with us. He planned the project and is making a contract for work with us. He commissions companies that work for him and ultimately build the house for us. We basically have nothing to do with the selection of the companies. With the contract for work, he therefore owes us the house.

The problem is that he created a cost estimate which is now exceeded by the contract for work offered to us by just 20,000 euros. If that’s all.

We basically want to know whether we have been taken in because we didn’t pay proper attention during planning, during the creation of cost estimates or the submission of the bill of quantities for the building application, or whether he is trying to pull a fast one on us and extract the maximum possible profit for himself.

Does the bill of quantities submitted by him with the associated cost estimate have any legal significance, or could I have just played Russian roulette myself and written any number under the line?

The architect acts as both site manager and planner for us. He planned the project and makes a work contract with us. He commissions companies to work for him and ultimately build the house for us. We basically have nothing to do with selecting the companies. Therefore, he owes us the house under the work contract.

Now it's slowly becoming clear ... and unpleasant ... and exciting ...

There is a significant difference (architect law, chambers) between a freelance architect and a construction-industry architect.

The freelance architect is commissioned by the client and is on their side. He is their trustee and is independent of the companies carrying out the construction.

The construction-industry licensed architect has, due to his activities (e.g., as general contractor, or whatever), a financial interest in the construction process and is not primarily on the side of the client who commissioned him.

Additionally, the building application documents were signed by a third party with whom you have no direct business relationship, an interesting situation...

Your main problem now is that legally there are only you and the opposing party, i.e., you urgently need expertise on your side that informs you neutrally about the consequences of this situation. I would gather all contract documents and go straight to a specialized lawyer.

Regards WD

Hello,

There is no "main contract" that includes everything. We have concluded a planning contract. It includes performance phases 1-4. Furthermore, we have concluded a contract for the planning of the structural works / statics.

The documents for the building application were signed by a planner / certified engineer authorized to submit building permits, appointed by him.

The architect is both construction manager and planner for us. He planned the project and we are entering into a work contract with him. He commissions companies to work for him and ultimately build the house for us. Basically, we have nothing to do with the selection of the companies. So he owes us the house under the work contract.

Unlike "WD," I am still no wiser.

In one post you write about a "planning contract" and a "separate contract for structural work & statics" (the structural planning includes all LPs) and again in this one about a "work contract". At the same time, your architect is also your construction manager; consequently, you have commissioned all performance phases. Why another female architect signed the building application is becoming somewhat clear. In your construct – assuming I have understood your piecemeal explanations correctly – it is about excluding liability for your planning architect, who – viewed soberly – is operating in the business of a general contractor. However, you cannot prove this because his signature is missing on the meaningful documents – this person does not appear on any paper; at least not on any that would be relevant. Accordingly, you also do not conclude a work contract with him, but rather contracts/agreements for each trade with "x" craftsman firms?

The problem is that he created a cost estimate that now exceeds the work contract offered to us by just €20,000. If that is enough.
Basically, we want to know whether we have been duped because we did not pay proper attention during planning, when creating cost estimates or submitting bills of quantities for the building application, or whether he is trying to pull the wool over our eyes and extract the greatest possible profit for himself.

Maybe a naive question, but I’m starting to feel tricked. Why don’t you just pay your planner/the architect the "planning costs" incurred and find a building partner whose contractual setup is less opaque and calls their craftsmanship by its proper name?

Regards from the Rhineland

The planning costs (phases 1-4) have all been paid. The subsequent contract would now be the construction contract, which has not yet been signed. The contract for the structural engineering - as stated - corresponds to phases 1-4, and the execution planning is not part of the contract. We would have already concluded the construction contract with him, at least he is listed as the contractor and not his authorized engineer. We do not conclude contracts with the individual companies; he does that. To what extent is the architect obliged to hand over all the documents that have been produced for the house so far if we now want to pack up our stuff and go to another company?

Does the bill of quantities he submitted with the associated cost estimate have any legal significance or could I have just played Russian roulette myself and written any number under the line?

Apart from the fact that you are already taking part in Russian roulette and entering the "home stretch," the legal assessment essentially depends on your contract design. What was agreed upon, and which law is to be applied. (I'm not asking further here, the required lawyer for construction and architectural law gladly charges >200 € / hour, the answers will probably come by themselves.)

As I said, in the probably existing contract structure you have neither legal assistance nor construction-technical expertise on your side.
That’s the crux of the matter, the 20k is only a warm-up.

WD