Cost estimation for demolition and new construction

The expert speaks of "considerable need for renovation" but does not go into further detail. From the photos and what I can see from the outside, nothing much has been done to the house since the extension in the 70s, but it does not look "as if it will collapse soon."

That does not necessarily have to be a "structural" issue. With the experts from the ZV, the name of the expert is listed – do they come from the real estate agent side or a technical construction background? Often, it is "simply" all a job for the big hammer – bathrooms, kitchens, windows, etc. – but if the foundation is fine, maybe an option.

The expert speaks of "considerable need for renovation" but does not go into further detail.

Perhaps an explanation for that. This can already be from the expert's point of view: - old/leaky windows - heating still existing beyond the theoretical expiration date - old electrical wiring - old bathrooms / pipes - doors to be renewed or: - water damage - leaky roof - rotten beam ceiling Nearly every house from the 60s on which nothing has been done receives this description. Even if it is basically in good condition.

It doesn't necessarily have to be a "structural" issue right away. The name of the expert from the ZV is always included - does he come from the real estate agent sector or from a construction technical background?
Often, "simply" everything is a case for the big hammer - bathrooms, kitchens, windows, etc. - but if the basic grounds fit, maybe an option.

Is it dependent on the federal state? My brother mentioned that, too. Here, everything that makes persons identifiable was removed from the report.
We want to look into the file again in court ourselves and hope the missing information can be found there. The creditor running the proceedings and the land register excerpt are also interesting.

But quarantine from the child and restricted opening hours mean that it will have to wait a bit longer.

Everything that could identify individuals was removed from the expert report.

Accordingly, you did not mean one of your own with the expert, but one from the auction procedure. If access was not granted to him, I see that as an indication that the object was still inhabited at the time of the inspection (and then probably by someone who would soon have it taken away from under their nose, which is rather unlikely to motivate careful handling). That would reasonably give me concerns about receiving it in a tenant-nomad state.

Accordingly, you meant by the expert not one of yours, but one from the auction procedure. If no access was granted to him, I see that as an indication that the object was still inhabited at the time of the inspection (and then probably by someone who is about to have it taken away from under them, which rather does not motivate careful handling). That would make my fears justified that I might get it in a tenant-nomadic state.

I must have expressed that unclearly. Yes, a court-appointed expert who was not allowed to enter.
Therefore, for us, a "black box" where pretty much anything can happen and my wish is to estimate the costs of the worst case (demolition, new construction).

Is it dependent on the federal state? My brother already thought that too. Here, everything that could identify persons was removed from the expert report.

That may well be. Personally, I think that a court-appointed expert should also have their name included in the report.