Extension of construction time due to scaffolding

Hello everyone,

we and a family that we have known for about 10 years now have each purchased a plot of land. This plot was previously a property of just under 1200m² and was split into equal parts. We, family B, have the rear plot, family A has the front plot.

Both families are building with the same construction company.

Now, after all the preconditions on our side have been met—construction water, electricity, crane positions, as well as construction road and access road—the following letter came from the construction company:

---
Agreement between Client A and Client B

Client A is building on the front part of the property, Client B on the rear part of the property! The space conditions are tight.
(The plot is 18m wide and these houses have a footprint of approximately 9.5 x 9.5)

Furthermore, Client B has a pedestrian, vehicle and pipeline right on the front plot with a width of approximately 3 m as an access road to their rear plot. This access road will be used during the construction phase as a construction/access road for the rear construction project B.

Therefore, there may be impairments during the construction of project B if the front project A is under construction and the necessary scaffolding work for erecting walls, ceilings, roof truss, roof covering and exterior plaster blocks the access road to the rear project B.

The impairments either involve construction interruptions on the rear project (additional construction costs due to interruption) for Client B or occasionally possible/necessary manual transport of building materials to the rear construction site (additional construction costs for Client B).

Furthermore, Client B may also request or need a repeated dismantling and reassembly of the scaffolding from the front construction project A (additional costs for Client A).

Many of these costs can be avoided by coordinated planning of the start of construction and through fair and trusting coordination between the two parties as well as mutual consideration. Without this coordination, an orderly start of construction is hardly possible at least for the front project A due to the blocking of the access to the rear plot. On the other hand, the rear project B needs a “funnel entrance” on the front plot so that heavy construction vehicles (turning radius) can drive to the rear building body.

Otherwise, for example, the concrete elements for assembling the ceilings and walls of the rear project B would have to be transferred onto chargeable (smaller) preliminary wagons at cost. Therefore, both parties have a strong interest in agreeing on an amicable regulation in advance.

Therefore, the parties agree as follows:
1. The rear project B will start with (earthworks + slab, ground floor walls) before project A. Clients B and A will ensure that their projects start promptly.

2. Clients A allow Client B to drive on/use their property during the construction phase, but at the latest until the completion of project A.

3. After the foundation/basement slab, ground floor walls, ceiling and upper floor walls, roof truss, windows/front door as well as delivery of facade insulation, roof covering and gravel for the screed at project B, work on project A will continue.

4. In return, Clients B tolerate that during the construction phase of project A (erection of walls, ceilings, roof truss, roof covering, facade) a scaffold is on the access road (area with pedestrian, vehicle and pipeline rights). This may delay the completion of project B or the move-in of Client B to their new home. Possibly, during the time the scaffold of project A is on the access, no house connections for project B can be made. Therefore, house connections must be applied for and commissioned early enough with the utilities.

5. Both parties want to cooperate trustfully and in a neighborly manner regarding this.

6. Any additional costs that may arise from this agreement for the respective clients shall be borne by each party itself, unless otherwise agreed between the parties. Conversely, any potential cost advantages arising from this agreement also remain entirely with the respective party. Claims for damages against third parties due to construction delays or extensions based on this agreement, especially against , are excluded.

---

To us, this now sounds like a carte blanche. Both families have a contractual agreement on how long the construction company has to finish the houses.

Of course, we, Clients B and A, want to agree so that both construction projects can be completed as quickly as possible. As mentioned, the agreement should be made between our families and with point 6 we take our construction company out of all obligations.

All these points were never mentioned before (before contract signing or until now—possible start of construction).

In addition, there is an "explanation to the agreement," which reads as follows:

----
The Besta hereby confirms that it strives to start project B promptly and preferably as soon as the construction start prerequisites are met, and to advance the work on project A quickly. The same applies to the start of project A.

Furthermore, the declares that it will not claim any price increase for Client A that results from the contract and supplemental agreement due to a delayed start of construction A if the cause for the delayed start A lies in the agreement between Clients B and A about the first start of project B and the later start of project A.

will also not assert any costs for possible construction delays with the two parties if they are based on the aforementioned regulations.

points out that prerequisites for the start of construction besides the building permit, wall and ceiling planning, selection and securing of financing according to the construction contract and construction coordination are especially unrestricted availability of construction water and electricity and functioning solar thermal system, as well as sufficiently stabilized access road, crane parking space and material storage area to be available 6 weeks before the start of construction.

----

At the current stage, both families will not accept this as is. What do you think, is this correct or are there other ways or means to solve this problem?

Thank you very much for your help

At first glance, it sounds great that the construction company is preparing and proactively informing you that you might hinder each other and that, in this case, unavoidable delays are likely. The construction company is not responsible for this delay, and the deadline shifts. Where is the problem?

If you agree as neighbors, you could just sign it, right? Or am I overlooking a specific clause that is problematic?

Otherwise, you could also agree that the one whose house is finished first provokes a time overrun, and you share the resulting contractual penalty. Just hypothetically.

I can fully understand the construction company. What exactly bothers you and which alternatives do you want to propose to the construction company that they can also accept? Sounds like "Wash me, but don't get me wet" from you.

Thank you for your answers. The plots were brokered by the construction company, so we have to build with them as well. If they broker the plots, the conditions should have been known from the start. That means, shouldn't the construction company have pointed out that the contractual time cannot be met? The houses are entirely built by the construction company, over which we have no influence. According to the contract, a construction period of x weeks is agreed. Due to the above-mentioned agreement, we would in turn bypass this agreed time and the construction company could take much, much longer and also not pay any penalty for delay. Perhaps we are also being too cautious.

I would not sign that. But I would have had the construction contract and [LB] reviewed by experts beforehand. Obviously, you have not done that. You certainly have not appointed your own expert for construction supervision either.....

I can understand the construction company as well, but it sounds like they are to blame themselves.

The property situation and the clients were known before the contract was signed. Now they have two signed contracts including a deadline (and probably also a penalty clause) and want the clients not to refer to it. Of course, you can do that, but not without compensation!?