Evaluation of Construction Project / Credit Offer

Now it’s really getting curious... It clearly states that this is of course not recognized by any bank, but by definition it is nothing other than equity. We want a barbecue hut, it is already there, so these costs do not occur in our project. Not decisive for the financing itself, but since the question arose as to what "items" we are contributing, it was mentioned (and it is clearly distinguished from creditable equity).

that is a hobby and not value-increasing for the bank.

What speaks against baking slightly smaller rolls?
Wouldn't 160m² also do?
The personal contribution is definitely overestimated. I don't mean whether the bank will accept it or not. But saving 20k € just on flooring is absolutely unrealistic. Apart from the fact that I find it catastrophic to tile living spaces, but of course that is purely a matter of taste.
With a bit less living space, it will be financially more relaxed.
Overall, your situation is really very good, nice incomes and good prospects. But why make it harder than necessary?

Another in my humble opinion important topic: children only after the house is finished.
By then you might already be 35, and it could still take some time (years) until it really works out. It is also not uncommon that it simply doesn't work out. So if you really have a serious desire to have children, I in your position would not wait any longer for some perfect timing, I would go for it today.
In my humble opinion, this kind of family planning (first build the house / don’t want to get pregnant or get married first / oh let’s first get the promotion and doctorate done) ranges somewhere between grossly unrealistic and arrogance.

P.S. The planned garden vacation in the next few years does not quite fit with the timeline for the outdoor area. Relaxation probably won’t be very deep in the building desert.

If a topic in this subforum has so many pages after a short time, you know immediately without reading that there is whining, primarily from Mr. Help, whose name is rendered absurd by his posts.

Yes, the personal contribution must be critically questioned. And yes, the restrictions become a duty instead of an option and are painful. But the OP has addressed both (!) multiple times in detail. Multiple times. Either he implements it or he has a problem, he knows that now. So why can’t you just leave it at that or accept it?! Why do some people not even properly read the answers? He had to repeat three times (!!) that he understands that the barbecue hut is not equity, he only answered the question of what outdoor facilities he brings along...
Here there is always plenty of weighing whether financing fits, is tight, is not possible at all, etc., but the tone here is annoyingly irritating over and over.
First ask questions specifically, read the answer calmly, and then give opinions and recommendations garnished with arguments. Over the course of the thread, some things have rightly been relativized, but it takes 10 pages and an OP who must be thanked for not having disappeared again.

My opinion on your question , I find it quite doable if you adjust the personal contribution and really manage to massively restrict vacations. Then do it when you feel comfortable with it, not just when the banker does. You have a good income, the interest rate is good, waiting and saving is rather not an option due to the price increase on the market.

1900,- / sqm is, by the way, still possible in rural Saarland, that’s where the OP comes from, so it’s not completely unrealistic. Also, some points have really been calculated generously, for earthworks (caution, it can also go the other way) and kitchen, for example, we were about 20k cheaper in total.

When a topic in this subforum has so many pages after a short time, you know immediately without reading that there is whining going on, primarily from Mr. Help, whose name is made absurd by his posts.

Yes, the personal contribution is critically to be questioned. And yes, the restrictions become a duty instead of a privilege and hurt. But the OP has addressed both (!) several times in detail. Several times. Either he implements it or he has a problem, he now knows that. Why can't one just leave it at that or accept it?!
Why do some not properly read the answers? He had to repeat three times (!!) that he is aware that the barbecue hut is not equity, he only answered the question of what outdoor facilities he is bringing...
Here, one can repeatedly weigh whether financing fits, is tight, not possible at all, and much more, but the tone here is repeatedly terribly annoying.
First ask targeted questions, read the answer calmly and then give opinions and recommendations garnished with arguments. Over the course of the thread, some things are rightly relativized, but that needs 10 pages and an OP to be thanked for not having disappeared again.

My opinion on your question , I find it quite doable if you correct the personal contribution and you really manage to drastically restrict vacations. Then do it when you feel comfortable with it, not just when the banker does. You have a good income, the interest rate is good, waiting and saving will hardly be an option due to price increases in the market.

1900,- / sqm is, by the way, still possible in rural Saarland if anything, since the OP comes from there, so that is not entirely unrealistic. Also, some points are really calculated generously; in earthworks (caution, it can also go the other way) and kitchen, for example, we were about 20k cheaper overall.

Thank you very much for this contribution! I have indeed already considered logging off...

Thank you very much for this post! I have indeed already considered unsubscribing...

I can imagine that. Surely you expected/hoped for very different feedback, but life is not a wish concert. You just somehow hope that the criticism (at least the message behind it) gets through, makes the user think, and ultimately even protects them from too great a risk. Your „plan“ so far is based almost exclusively on eventualities and not on facts (will earn xxxx, will reduce consumption, will spend vacation in the garden, will provide such and such EL, etc.). The fact as of now is only that due to consumption you have neither saved any notable equity nor have a disposable net income that would make this project sum reasonably feasible without significant equity.

I can imagine that. Surely you expected/hoped for a completely different feedback, but life is not a wish concert. One just somehow hopes that the criticism (at least the message behind it) gets through, makes the user think, and ultimately even protects against too great a risk. Your "plan" so far is almost exclusively based on eventualities and not on facts (I will earn xxxx, I will reduce consumption, I will spend my vacation in the garden, I will provide so and so much EL, etc.). The fact currently is only that due to consumption you neither have saved significant equity nor have available net income that would make this project sum reasonably feasible without significant equity.

It’s not about the feedback itself for me here, it should be as honest and precise as possible...

It’s about the manner and above all that here it feels like 80% apparently are not able to read posts (but then want to give others tips regarding possible financing – how is that supposed to work if simply reading posts obviously already represents a problem?)

Of course, our plan relies exclusively on eventualities, that’s just what a plan and a future outlook are like, that will be the same for anyone else. Every plan is ultimately only as good as it is implemented.

We are also clear that if we do not stop our consumption, the project is doomed to fail; however, I fundamentally do not need feedback here for this, it’s about food for thought and possibly people who were in a comparable situation and how things went for them.

I also always find it nice that various points are mentioned here repeatedly without really backing everything up with facts.

Counter question to those who say our net income would not be sufficient for a project of this scale: What do you consider to be sufficient net income for this?

I want to make a nice comparison regarding net income:
Currently, I have 15 km (one way) to work, but as of today, I have an offer of 3,900 € net per month, which is 95 km (one way) away.
If I were to accept this offer now, the unanimous opinion here would probably be that we can now manage the project without problems, but that this higher income was bought through significantly greater effort that would only partly be reflected in usual expenses would be ignored.

Therefore, in detail, hand on heart:
What monthly surplus would you consider appropriate to be able to manage the project?