Energy expert refuses further support

The idea of declaring a new building as a renovation has occurred to quite a few people, and they have spectacularly failed. But I believe you will find an energy consultant who will accompany your construction project! There are plenty of them. And some of them accompany the whole process only with photos without ever having set foot on the construction site.

Uh, in building law, it is usually no longer referred to as renovation but as new construction when structurally relevant components are removed or replaced. Not yet for individual beams, but as soon as the load-bearing structure is changed to a relevant extent, it is considered new construction. The aim of a renovation is to restore an original building condition or to adapt it to modern requirements. Interesting building authority, I say.

I also see it as a new build. But whatever, now the goal is to save the funding.

Why did the energy consultant even accept the contract? Didn’t he know about the plan with the "Rückbau"?
In a normal renovation, you discuss your plans and, for example, apply as much insulation as the energy expert recommends. Very strange.

I would first call the existing energy consultant to find out how it got to this point and why the change of heart came only now.
Then check again and clarify with the building authority that it really counts as a renovation.
Then I would generally call KfW and get advice on how to proceed in such a case.
At the same time, look for a new consultant and play with open cards.

applied for funding from KFW (program 461 - residential building grant) and received approval.

The leaflet for 461 states: "The building application or the building notification of the existing building must be at least five years old at the time of the application." How does this generally fit into the timeline?

Some people have already come up with the idea of declaring a new building as a renovation and have severely fallen on their faces. But I believe you will find an energy consultant to accompany your construction project!

I once encountered an energy consultant in prison social work. It is really a hot potato to certify things that hinge on the disbursement of public funds. The energy consultant has to be extremely careful not to end up being the one who pays the price in the end. Although the KfW is indeed correct with the tip that the assessment of the building authority points the way, if the building authority was smoking the wrong stuff and eventually an auditor comes along, this usually means repayment and fines for the builder, but loss of license and (considering his ability to assess the severity of the facts) a harsher punishment for the energy consultant.

I also see it as a new building. But whatever, now it’s about saving the funding.

Instead of the original poster, I would call the KfW – not the switchboard, but the department head of the caseworker! – and discuss the problem: you followed the advice, ended up on the wrong path, and now need to be guided back on the right track; inquire how to proceed so that the original application date is taken into account. A new energy consultant is not necessary for this, you can explain the matter to him just as well. If he understands that you did not want to involve him in a crime, he will have no problem with the matter.

Thank you for the contributions and the discussion. If I were not personally interested, I would probably also tend to classify it as a new building without prior knowledge. But that is not the case! The building authority has researched very thoroughly and coordinated internally for weeks. There are various reasons that led to the decision, and I hardly believe that smoking questionable substances was one of these reasons. The following distinction was decisive:

- A reconstruction after demolition is a new building
- A reconstruction after partial demolition is a renovation

And now the WEG comes into play: if only individual ownership is demolished, then this is considered a partial demolition within the meaning of the WEG.

In addition, only the portion of individual ownership is being rebuilt. This means that the ratio between individual and common property does not change after the construction measure.

We have now found another EEE who is willing to accompany the project and prepare the BnD, and supposedly only checking a box in the form is sufficient to indicate that the BnD has been prepared by another expert.