Fall protection on height changes (partially over 1.00 m)

I doubt that or it depends on where, search for [umwehrung] on Wikipedia, quite well explained.

Correct, properly accessed areas, I had remembered wrongly.

: I find stainless steel concrete screws / screw anchors interesting. Do you perhaps also know a source / alternatives where one can easily buy them privately?

A cordless impact driver is already available for changing tires and would appreciate work between Easter and October...

Now you're starting to quibble, aren't you embarrassed? What exactly does that get you?

The declaration of division is, as far as I remember, to our advantage. If I have it right in my head, we have the exclusive right of use, but we have no obligations. Sounds unusual, but that's how it is. That means we wouldn't even have to take care of maintenance, not pay for the water from the outside faucet, etc. (which we are currently doing). I think then we also wouldn't be responsible for security.

Ok, so that means if "theoretically" damage occurs. For example, your visitor falls down. Who is then theoretically liable? Your visitor won't care about what rights and obligations look like, they will demand compensation for their damage. But if you only have rights, why don't you bring up this point at the owners' meeting? Let the owners pay then.

Ok, that means if "theoretically" damage occurs. For example, your visitor falls down. Who is then theoretically liable? Your visitor will not be interested in how rights and obligations look like, they will demand compensation for their damage. But if you only have rights, why don’t you bring up the point in the owners' meeting? Let the owners pay.

Exactly, that’s what I meant.

The owners' meeting also came to my mind earlier. Since the whole fence consideration is relatively new, I wasn’t clear about many things yet. First of all, the legal side, i.e., what is required. The objection here regarding the insurance was very interesting and helpful; before, it only occurred to me casually. Although I thought, if it is not legally required... is it really the case that the insurance can still refuse payment? Of course, the injured party does not really care who pays. However, the owners will not approve a fence, at most only if I pay for it entirely out of my own pocket. Pointing out the insurance risks will not help. By now I know the people here too well for that. There have been (unfortunately) clearer matters that would have been directly useful to everyone or even partly necessary, and even those were rejected because most did not want to pay. They prefer to take the risk rather than invest even 50€. Nevertheless, I definitely want some kind of security, preferably a double rod panel fence. In the end, the greatest risk is for my family and our guests. Otherwise, realistically, hardly anyone ever enters the garden. As I said, we also paid for the hedges ourselves, even though we technically didn’t have to. They have thus become part of the common property... but what choice do we have if we want it nice (and safe).

Such screw anchors are also available, for example, from Fischer and other brands. Hilti has a patented design with the new screws. These can be loosened and retightened in the same hole. Probably works with others too... but I only know Hilti from personal experience. Don't you know anyone with a business license? You buy under their name and then pay including VAT... then everything is clean. The acquaintance also benefits from higher sales and possibly better discounts. Otherwise, I would rely on Fischer.

But I understood you correctly that such ones are screwed directly (without dowels) into the concrete!? Because with Tox and Hilti I read something about dowel length, although no dowels are shown in the application instructions ops: Did I miss something or misinterpret it? With Tox it even said only for indoor use...that would then be unsuitable for a fence.