Developer New Build: Buy two apartments and then combine them

Hello! I hope to receive some experience/assessments regarding the following situation:

A developer is offering the new construction of terraced houses on his property. The individual terraced houses are partly offered as "single-family houses" and partly as "multi-family houses" (i.e. basically the same house, but divided into a ground floor apartment A and an upper floor apartment B). Now all the "single-family houses" are already reserved and only one "multi-family house" is still available. For us, the property would only be interesting if it can be used as a "single-family house". In this context, the developer offered us that the still available "multi-family house" can also be built as a "single-family house". The procedure he proposes to us would be as follows:

Since the construction description, building permit, certificate of completion, and partition declaration already exist for the current planning (i.e. with "multi-family house with apartment A and B") and the notary appointments (of all buyers) are planned for early May, we would first have to present everything as before, i.e. that the two units are separate. However, a special request list will be created for us, in which the deviations from the current construction description including the merging of apartments A and B are recorded. Plans will also be attached which show the two apartments A and B according to the current planning as well as according to the final change after merging according to the special request list. All these documents will then be attached as part of the notary contract.

Subsequently, in May, we are to sign the notarial purchase contract for both apartments. The developer will then incorporate the merged planning into the detailed planning and produce a [Tektur] (amended building application). After the [Tektur] is approved by the building authority, an updated certificate of completion will be issued and then the partition declaration changed. All no problem, but there would be fees for the [Tektur] as well as for the changes to the certificate of completion and partition declaration, which we would have to bear.

What is your opinion on this proposal? Is that something one can do? Is this a typical procedure? (It seems to happen quite often that people buy two apartments and merge them). We—as laypeople—would basically prefer that all documents be adapted to the TARGET condition BEFORE the notary appointments to avoid all the "subsequent" changes. That means we would preferably buy the house as we want it, and not two apartments with such a "special request list". In particular, we also see some risks on our side, e.g. that our financing conditions worsen (i.e. the bank values the lending value for the two separate apartments lower than the merged house), that the building authority does not approve the [Tektur] (i.e. the house would have to be built with the two apartments), or that co-owners do not agree to a subsequent change in the partition declaration (additionally, note that by merging the two apartments, common property would also have to be built differently in one place than shown in the current plan—which might be blocked by the co-owners).

Thanks in advance for any tip, note, or simply opinion on whether you would do something like this :-)

Something like this was done for me beforehand. However, the developer already had this wish. So I didn't have to convince him of anything. If everything really becomes part of the notary contract, then from my point of view there is nothing against it. Otherwise, he will simply find someone else who will take the house as is. So I wouldn't insist on it at all costs just because of a few hundred euros or a low thousand euros more in fees.

Something like that was done for me before. However, the developer also already wanted it that way. So I didn’t have to convince him of anything. If everything really becomes part of the notary contract, then from my point of view there is no objection. Otherwise, they’ll simply find someone else who takes the house like that. So I wouldn’t insist on it at all costs just because of a few hundred EUR or a low thousand EUR more fees.

Thanks for your quick response and for sharing your experience! Our main concern wasn’t really about the fees for the changes – maybe that came across wrong in my post. We are more worried (possibly even excessively so) about this somewhat indirect approach of "we buy two apartments at the notary and not a house" and if afterwards something doesn’t go according to plan, we end up with the two apartments that we don’t want.

That's why I say, if everything, including the "Baulichen" association along with plans etc., is part of the notarial contract, I wouldn't worry too much.

I would double-check that the construction of apartments was not part of the tender and the approval process. Some municipalities insist on the creation of apartments.

I assume that the complex is divided under WEG anyway.

This would mean for you that you receive 2 service charge statements and possibly have to pay bills that are not allocated according to MEA but rather per dwelling unit twice (e.g. management fees), or that this must be regulated in the management contract. (I know this from a 3-room condominium that was originally planned as 2 and 1-room condominiums). Also, with tenant changes, we have to remind the management every time that the moving flat rate must not be charged for 2 apartments.

Why does the developer want it this way? Quite simply, a new declaration of division costs notary fees – and these are calculated based on the total value of the complex (because the declaration of division applies to that) and not on the value of the changes (i.e. the 2 apartments).