Fixed price offer with construction price index adjustment in the construction contract

In this respect, I disagree with @WilderSueden and @kati1337. Why should the contractor offer a fixed price? You dawdle with the building permit and financing, and the risk of a construction cost increase lies exclusively with the contractor? Is that fair? Exactly the opposite view, which everyone takes as normal.

You misunderstand something. I am not in favor of an unlimited fixed price, to my knowledge, such a thing does not exist either. Fixed prices are all linked to meeting certain conditions – usually building permit and financing, for prefabricated builders also sample selection – within a certain period, e.g. 5 months. The builder can factor that in. Well, sometimes they really mess up, like e.g. Schwörerhaus, who still offered 18 months fixed price for quick-deal closings in December '20... and a good year later then €30,000 if you don't want to build your house...

No, not worse odds than with a provider offering a real fixed price. He already factors in a 20% price increase in his offer, instead of the 10% yours is currently making. Meet the conditions necessary for the start of construction – because from then on, it’s 8.5 months of construction time. At least that’s how I understood you.

If the conditions are met, then the construction schedule will be created, construction time approx. 8.5 months from the start of construction. We are scheduled for May 23, but in my opinion, that is not part of the contract.

In this respect, I disagree with and . Why should the contractor offer a fixed price? You’re dragging your feet with the building permit and financing and the risk of a construction price increase lies solely with the contractor? Is that fair? Exactly the opposite viewpoint, but everyone assumes it as normal.

And once again: A real fixed price usually only applies for a certain period of time. And if you then fail to meet the conditions for construction, you’re seriously screwed. If you do manage it, the contractor will probably be happy because he hasn’t used up his big risk buffer and earns more.

We do not want a risk for the contractor, but we don’t want that either. That’s why a fixed construction start would be a solution in the contract. Provided, of course, that we have done our homework (financing, building permit). Otherwise, any delay cannot be charged to the contractor.

If the prerequisites are met, then the construction schedule will be created, construction time approx. 8.5 months from the start of construction. Although we are planned for May 23, in my opinion, this is not part of the contract.

Then make a schedule part of the contract.

We do not want any risk for the contractor, but we do not want that either. Therefore, a fixed start of construction would be a solution in the contract. Provided, of course, that we have done our homework (financing, building permit). Otherwise, a delay cannot be attributed to the contractor.

Yep, exactly. The deal has to be enjoyable for both parties.

The company has no influence on your planning and the building authority.
In hindsight, I would say, have something written in like:
Planning and submission of the building application still in 2022 and:
After fulfillment of all requirements that the client is responsible for, construction must begin within x weeks (8 or so maybe then?).

Otherwise, you might have the building permit in April and have completed your part, and the company says yes but we scheduled you for August, sorry please pay more.

The risk that construction prices will continue to rise in the meantime is not eliminated by this. So if you are really already at your limit and 10-15% would break your neck - and hand on heart, that's a lot of money - I would still be cautious with the contract. I wouldn't interpret the graphic from the first page in the thread as meaning that rising construction prices are over. We always had a slightly different case because we also included planning and building permits and that stuff in the offer. So if something was misplanned and therefore could not be approved, that was not our problem; the construction company also had to take responsibility for that.

I find it more than remarkable that the crystal ball of many participants here already seems to foresee an end to the price jumps, even assuming a declining trend in construction prices...

Let's make it short and painful:
You are signing an absolute surprise package. With your signature, you would be... to put it bluntly... legally obliged to pay your general contractor 50% more if the construction price index increases by 60 percentage points.
Absurd? Well, since 2019 we have seen an increase of 37%.

Make this clear, and I mean it as seriously as I write it:
The development of prices or the entire European economy currently depends on two essential factors...

How harsh will the winter be?
How quickly will the war in Ukraine end?

If we experience a massive cold snap in January 2023, large parts of the building materials industry will shut down, if only because gas needs to be saved. If Russia resorts to the nuclear option in Ukraine... no idea what impact that will have, but certainly not good ones. Building materials have also become speculative goods.

In short:
You are signing to your general contractor, to put it casually, "We want the house, no matter what it costs..."
Sad, and I have it easy to say... but
just
don't
do
it.

Or at least wait until spring 2023... then we will know more, including with regard to alternative LNG supplies from various countries. Currently, this is a gamble with all your capital.