General contractor / prefabricated house provider with an existing BG (HOAI Phase 4)

We want a fixed price guarantee, which the architect cannot give us (and neither can anyone else), but a general contractor/prefabricated house provider certainly can.

... because the latter passes on possible, but not at all certain, cost increases to you immediately and not only during the course of the construction project. The architect estimates €500,000 and the builders are totally disappointed if the house costs €550,000. But they praise the GC/prefabricated house provider to the skies when there is a price guarantee for the same house at €575,000. But who has built cheaper in the end? Those who build with an architect often put too little thought into the budget and are therefore disappointed.

We want a fixed price guarantee, which the architect cannot give us (nor anyone else), but a general contractor/prefabricated house provider certainly can.

Price bindings can be agreed upon in the tender. Laymen in construction always operate under loads of misconceptions. But the architect should be able to clarify how a tender works.

Therefore, we want to combine the best of "both worlds" and advance the planning with a local architect, then carry out the construction with a general contractor or prefabricated house provider. The architect has already chosen this path several times with other building clients.

If you want to continue advancing the planning with the architect—which I recommend—then you have the best of both worlds. However, the last sentence reinforces my suspicion that you chose the wrong architect: many clients today specifically look for architects only up to service phase 4, and some architects adapt to that and simply don’t take on the "rest." Of course, they are then glad when they don’t have to do what they can’t. Lazy artists :-(

Our GÜ, who also works as a GU (and even a genuine BT), recently said that the external planning hardly makes his share any cheaper, since his architect/site manager first have to get familiar with the project and may have to put a lot of thought (and time) into implementing some ideas from the application planning. However, I was also very satisfied with the architectural service.

Our GÜ, who also works as a GU (and even a real BT), recently said that external planning hardly makes his share any cheaper because his architect/site manager first have to get familiar with the project

In the absence of service phase 5, an external planner is practically just a routine breaker for the contractor. Small sins are punished immediately by the good Lord - here: with drywall. The phrase "hardly cheaper" is of course a strong understatement.