GÜ insolvent - and now? (Payment plan etc.)

Exceptionally, I’m not just throwing out grumpy one-liners or long-winded explanations somewhere between ( ) but have a concern myself. As already mentioned in "andernthreads," our GÜ has filed for insolvency. The court apparently approved the self-administration within one day (so the business naturally continues), and they as well as all parties involved expect that the mess can be pulled out of the dirt quite easily by April. They say so. What the owner/manager says about how this came about sounds plausible. Additionally, he wouldn’t have had to inform us, but he did. We are building according to VOB, so we have a right to cancel. For various reasons, however, we do not want to exercise this right unless absolutely necessary. But of course, it is extremely important to us, especially in this situation, not to overpay, so it would be totally great if you could take another critical look at our payment plan (The manager wants to come a bit further towards us "as compensation for the upset and uncertainty" in the payment plan and/or price, so we are still in the negotiation phase, even though our construction is starting in parallel).

Our contract states:

1st installment: after submission of the building application documents 5%
2nd installment: after pouring of foundations and base slab 20%
3rd installment: after erecting the roof truss 15%
4th installment: after window installation without front door 15%
5th installment: after completion of interior plaster without supplementary plaster works 10%
6th installment: after completion of screed work without showers and house connection openings 13%
7th installment: after tiling work, but without skirting the interior doors 15%
8th installment: after installation of interior doors and staircase system 5%
9th installment: after final works 2%

Contract sum is 300,000. Essential equipment (which influences the cost breakdown per trade):
Painter and flooring work included
Electric venetian blinds on almost all windows
Controlled residential ventilation with enthalpy heat exchanger (Wolf Comfort CWL 400 Excellent)
a lift-and-slide door
a double door with light panel
The building structure is very simple, rectangular floor plan, 2 full floors, 23° pitched roof.

Further upgrades (especially heating: currently gas, later commissioned as brine heat pump) are handled via change orders, which will of course only be billed after installation; normally (if "within scope") bundled at the end. Earthworks generated cost savings of ~1500 €, which are also included in the change orders.

We contractually have a right to a 5% completion bond. We have now requested this, but naturally will not receive it (unless one happens to be floating around there). We will probably accept its omission in exchange for retention of the corresponding amount, right?

I would greatly appreciate the concentrated forum expertise, and if anyone feels like it, also tell me where we might have been stupid and naive. Go ahead. I do know that myself, but it also feels good to get that off my chest
(And of course, the post ended up long-winded again, sorry…)

Addendum: As of today, we have a sand base, marked building corners, and some materials on the property (KG pipe, styrofoam boards, reinforcing steel mats, that kind of floor slab stuff). Accordingly, we have paid the first 5% = 15 k€.

Also, I am not quite sure in which order the trades not listed in the payment plan fit into the framework…

We build according to VOB, so we have a right of termination

I can’t dismantle everything for you, you’ll need a lawyer for that, but building according to VOB with private clients is difficult. With private individuals you can only agree on what they could also acknowledge, and the VOB is not publicly accessible (unlike the Construction Code). Were you given the accompanying VOB? If not, in the worst case the entire contract is worthless.

My impression is that you sympathize a lot with your contractual partner and don’t want to look for another one now. That’s understandable because it ultimately means additional costs. From a rational perspective, you are in a good position if you haven’t invested any money yet, especially if you’re just starting out. The moral dilemma adds to this (if you terminate, it brings him a bit closer to the brink). In such situations, I would be selfish to protect myself. Just my opinion.

At the very least, I would insist on no advance payments (which are forbidden anyway). So the payment plan should be revised accordingly to be absolutely sure. Also, a retention of at least 5%, better 10%, over 5 years after completion to secure the warranty, in case he goes bankrupt. In practice, he probably won’t meet that due to lack of creditworthiness, which again leads to termination. He’s out of the picture, as the saying goes. He won’t get materials anywhere without prepayment either, because he lacks the credit line ... the game is up.

Thank you. I am aware that the VOB does not actually apply/cannot apply to consumers, but cherry-picking (right of termination in case of insolvency) is allowed in this case. In any case, I get out, one way or another.

I don't really have a moral dilemma. Their insolvency, their problem. But the additional costs would indeed be significant and the longer duration also caused distress (to the extent that I would consider another move, and I really don’t like moving…), which is why I actually don’t want to terminate but modify.

Unfortunately, I cannot advise you professionally. Getting out of a contract is one thing. The other is which services rendered must be paid for in this case. That can, in some cases, be significantly more than the first 5%.

The building structure is quite simple, rectangular floor plan, 2 full floors, 23° gable roof.

This is probably your first own thread, so I found nothing else about your house, i.e. I have no idea how many "specifics" are involved that are not so easily implemented by someone else.

The court apparently approved self-administration within one day

The competent judges don’t do such things for fun, so this looks like a real prospect of rescue. I therefore assume that no damages to social funds are expected and that the imbalance can be overcome within a manageable time.

From when do you count "within one day" – after own application, and there is no external application?

The managing director wants to "compensate us for the excitement and uncertainty" with some further concession in the payment plan and/or price, so we are still in the negotiation phase, although our construction is starting in parallel

But this really must be a very mild insolvency, if there is still liquidity available for something like that.

From this description I imagine a company that is only temporarily insolvent and does not have the more severe insolvency criterion of over-indebtedness. That means it has a decent managing director who has "informed" the insolvency court according to formal criteria before any creditor approached them.

Of course, I give no guarantees, but as far as this sounds it seems to be a case causing little concern.