Jetset
2017-11-17 09:08:47
- #1
Hello,
we already started building in October 2016. Since my partner and I both work full-time and the planned construction site was about a half hour drive from our old apartment, we commissioned our architect with the construction management.
He assigned an employee to lead his projects.
From the beginning, we were not particularly satisfied because the flow of information was insufficient and we only received answers after multiple inquiries.
Even before the shell construction was completed, the appointed site manager was dismissed and the architect took over personally.
Our hope that this would accelerate the work and that we would be better informed was unfortunately not fulfilled.
Quite the opposite. The architect visited the construction site at most once a week and was hard to reach.
Agreed appointments with the trades were rarely kept. It usually went like this: on Mondays, he briefly stopped by the construction site and then called us to inform us that certain work was to be done on Tuesday. When we then came over the weekend, we usually found that nothing had happened. When we called the architect, he was usually surprised. In my opinion, he almost never had an overview of what was going on at the site and what the current status was.
More or less with the motto... it will be finished eventually...
We had just gotten the screed when two days later rainwater came into the basement through openings in the basement wall for the heat pump connection. The architect knew about these and had roughly stuffed them with glass wool a week before... which of course did 0 good.
After the basement had to be dried out, he said it was no problem. Our construction insurance would pay for it... besides, we lost another 5 weeks because of this, which certainly could have been shortened.
I was at the construction site several times a week after all these incidents and almost every time I had to find out that the drying devices were not running because the fuse had tripped at the construction power distribution box. So they didn't run half the time. Of course, this was reported without result.
The worst was the painting company. One German and four Romanians. The matters were discussed on site with the German, but the employees who came never spoke a word of German and were unable to coordinate with the other trades on site and during their work spread more paint on the floor than on the walls.
After completion, they and the architect were asked three times to fix the insufficiently done work. Each time without success.
A key event was when our tiler left the construction site one evening after 7 pm and naturally locked the construction site door because the entrance area had just been newly tiled.
The painters were still on site after that. Because the construction site door was locked, they simply broke it open, walked over the freshly laid tiles and made another attempt to fix their insufficiently done work.
The next morning the tiler called and informed us, and the police were notified to record the damage.
Again, the architect tried to calm things down... the work was not that bad and still acceptable, and breaking open the construction site door was common practice on other construction sites.
We have now brought in a sworn expert who confirmed our suspicion. The work was performed poorly to unsatisfactorily. Estimated costs for corrections are around 6000 euros. In addition, he could not understand how the construction management allowed things to get this bad.
We have now handed the whole matter over to a lawyer.
My question:
To what extent can the construction management be held responsible, who was significantly involved in many problems?
Can deductions be made on the final invoice? And if so, would this hold up if he legally challenges it without prior warning?
we already started building in October 2016. Since my partner and I both work full-time and the planned construction site was about a half hour drive from our old apartment, we commissioned our architect with the construction management.
He assigned an employee to lead his projects.
From the beginning, we were not particularly satisfied because the flow of information was insufficient and we only received answers after multiple inquiries.
Even before the shell construction was completed, the appointed site manager was dismissed and the architect took over personally.
Our hope that this would accelerate the work and that we would be better informed was unfortunately not fulfilled.
Quite the opposite. The architect visited the construction site at most once a week and was hard to reach.
Agreed appointments with the trades were rarely kept. It usually went like this: on Mondays, he briefly stopped by the construction site and then called us to inform us that certain work was to be done on Tuesday. When we then came over the weekend, we usually found that nothing had happened. When we called the architect, he was usually surprised. In my opinion, he almost never had an overview of what was going on at the site and what the current status was.
More or less with the motto... it will be finished eventually...
We had just gotten the screed when two days later rainwater came into the basement through openings in the basement wall for the heat pump connection. The architect knew about these and had roughly stuffed them with glass wool a week before... which of course did 0 good.
After the basement had to be dried out, he said it was no problem. Our construction insurance would pay for it... besides, we lost another 5 weeks because of this, which certainly could have been shortened.
I was at the construction site several times a week after all these incidents and almost every time I had to find out that the drying devices were not running because the fuse had tripped at the construction power distribution box. So they didn't run half the time. Of course, this was reported without result.
The worst was the painting company. One German and four Romanians. The matters were discussed on site with the German, but the employees who came never spoke a word of German and were unable to coordinate with the other trades on site and during their work spread more paint on the floor than on the walls.
After completion, they and the architect were asked three times to fix the insufficiently done work. Each time without success.
A key event was when our tiler left the construction site one evening after 7 pm and naturally locked the construction site door because the entrance area had just been newly tiled.
The painters were still on site after that. Because the construction site door was locked, they simply broke it open, walked over the freshly laid tiles and made another attempt to fix their insufficiently done work.
The next morning the tiler called and informed us, and the police were notified to record the damage.
Again, the architect tried to calm things down... the work was not that bad and still acceptable, and breaking open the construction site door was common practice on other construction sites.
We have now brought in a sworn expert who confirmed our suspicion. The work was performed poorly to unsatisfactorily. Estimated costs for corrections are around 6000 euros. In addition, he could not understand how the construction management allowed things to get this bad.
We have now handed the whole matter over to a lawyer.
My question:
To what extent can the construction management be held responsible, who was significantly involved in many problems?
Can deductions be made on the final invoice? And if so, would this hold up if he legally challenges it without prior warning?