Craftsman drills into electrical line - who is liable?

I had such a cheap thing. After I realized that it didn't trip even directly at the socket, we got one from B O S C H blue.

In my opinion, it looks like this: if you have demonstrably pointed out the lines when placing the order (e.g. in the written order), the craftsman is responsible for the damage. He should have kept a sufficient distance, used a line detector, or refused the order if necessary. However, if the craftsman coordinated the drilling positions with you, you have thereby approved the positions and I see the responsibility with you. I am not a lawyer, but I come from plant engineering, where similar situations occur more often. How you actually agree is another matter.

Moreover, it does not have to be clarified whether a craftsman’s service actually exists

This is an official order and not a friendly service.

My impression is that no appropriately qualified craftsman registered in the craftsmen’s roll was commissioned here. At least, a clear statement about this has so far been avoided in the comments. However, I know from case law that the client is accused of lack of due diligence in choosing the craftsman and is therefore liable for damages to third parties caused by this craftsman. I assume the same applies to damages that have occurred to himself. But maybe a lawyer will chime in here.

If the craftsman has coordinated the position of the drillings with you, you have thereby approved the position and I see the responsibility with you.

This is the same argument the craftsman makes. If you think that through consistently, the client would always be to blame, no matter what the craftsman does, since the client always gives the "ok" to proceed – otherwise the work would not even begin. From my point of view, this is not a convincing argument. That is precisely why precedent cases would be interesting...

Hi everyone,

[*]This is an official assignment and not a favor. [*]Cable was not visible as it was laid under insulation. [*]Position was not fixed but varied in height.

I am actually surprised that there is no clear experience here. Something like this surely happens x times a day... Nevertheless, thanks for the previous statements.

you won't get it here either! It's like in court and the high seas. You can stay on top but also go under. For me it's a 50% chance! Do you want to sue now? Rather not! How high is the damage? Ever estimated?

You can stay afloat but also sink. It is a 50% chance for me!

Essentially, I see it that way in the first instance as well, and I suspect the amount in controversy here is in the district court range. The judge is negotiating between handbag theft and bicycle accident. In the dice cup, the only question is with which leg he got up and whether the boiled egg was done medium. However, I do not see the probability as 50:50, but rather 30:40:30 (win:settlement:defeat). If you have the better lawyer yourself, you can shift that to 32:40:28, that’s it. A not underemployed lawyer will probably advise an out-of-court settlement.

Since it may involve larger costs, I would be very grateful for advice (possibly with reference to legal foundations).

It should have become clear by now: you won’t be able to pull the desired paragraph 4711 of the Iamhright Code with the content "the other party can pack up" out of your pocket here any more than you can draw the Monopoly Chance card "go to jail - go directly there - do not pass Go - do not collect four thousand marks" ;-)