Disclosure obligation regarding optics? Is there such a thing?

Just ask the carpenter if you should recommend his work including the competent advice ...

I would suggest splitting the costs. You pay 50% because you commissioned it by phone without seeing it on site - that's clearly your fault. And he pays 50% because it just looks sh*** and he should never have advised it that way, because I don't believe it is common to have the cladding end flush with the windows. He should have noticed that with the roof overhang, this would be the result, at the latest when installing the battens. At that point, the damage would have been significantly less.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

Especially with the 'Stadtvilla Typ' I find it nicer when the beams at the bottom are covered. With the rafter heights common today, I find it ugly when you can see the ends of the beams. The problem here is more that the beams are not placed a bit higher. One more stone like in Bieber would have certainly looked better.

I would still leave it like this because, in my opinion, the other look does not fit a city villa. It's a matter of taste ....

One more stone than at Bieber would surely have looked better.

There are only roller shutter boxes and ring beams.

: meant was the distance between the window and the roof that is missing in the OP. Whether stone or ring beam ultimately does not matter ...

The problem with the construction by is probably that the cladding was boxed in at the bottom. In other words, the cladding was installed well below the gutter and covered at the front with sheets (see picture in post 11). Do you know why this was done?

meant was the distance between the window and the roof that the OP is missing. Whether stone or ring beam ultimately doesn't matter ...

Of course, only there is (with us) no additional stone, but only what belongs there anyway.

So that the cladding was installed clearly below the gutter and covered at the front with the sheets (see picture in post 11). Do you know why it was done that way?

Exactly, and I wonder whether under the term "in level" exactly that had to be understood. I would not have expected this type of boxing if I gave the order "in level."