Hire purchase of a solid new building

Hello everyone, we are a household of 4 people and have been looking for a home for a long time. We would get a budget of 250,000 euros from the bank. Here, you can only get a house from the 60s in need of renovation and refurbishment for that amount. That is not feasible. Now we have come across a new development project (Siedlung). Low-energy terraced houses are being built and can be purchased via rent-to-own. One house is still available. We have an appointment with the company tomorrow. Directly with a consultant from Allianz. On the internet, you mostly hear bad things about rent-to-own. I would like to know what we need to pay attention to and which questions are particularly important. Currently, we rent a 3 1/2 room apartment and soon need an extra bedroom. 4 room apartments are hard to find and, with a lot of luck, cost 1100 cold rent. Theoretically, rent-to-own sounds like an option. I am curious about opinions and information.

Opinion of a banker: Rent-to-own is a great thing - for the seller. I have nothing more to add.

If you know the framework conditions, you can form your own opinion. Usually, a down payment must be made (e.g. 10-30% of the purchase price), then a part of the rent over the term X is credited toward the purchase price (the seller also wants to make a good profit from such a deal) and at the end a final payment must be made. In total, always significantly more expensive than the "normal" purchase. The only advantage of rent-to-own for buyers is that it allows individuals/families to get a home they actually cannot afford (for which the buyers will pay a substantial surcharge over the term).

There is nothing to add to that...

You normally can't afford a house, let alone with rent-to-own, because for the buyer it is usually more expensive in the end than normal...

The rent-to-own offers the (supposed) advantage of lower risk, better liquidity, and lower creditworthiness requirements. This advantage costs money.

That all sounds logical of course, but if we theoretically bought an old house in need of renovation and refurbishment for 250000 (which would be possible) and added the costs and effort of renovation etc. and the higher additional costs due to the energy value in the long term, wouldn't we then come almost to the same as with a ready-to-move-in new building (Kfw 70) as rent-to-own?

That all sounds logical of course, but if we theoretically buy an old house in need of renovation and refurbishment for 250,000 (which would be possible) and add the costs and effort of renovation etc. and the higher ancillary costs due to the energy rating over time, wouldn't we end up almost the same as with a ready-to-move-in new build (KfW 70) as a rent-to-own?

No. Without going into details, here is a comparison of both options:

You as the builder pay (directly or indirectly):
- Construction costs (all building costs including development)
alternatively: Purchase price of existing property + renovation costs
- Financing costs
- Builder’s insurances
- Possibly brokerage fees (agents, commissions)

You as the rent-to-own buyer pay (directly or indirectly):
- Construction costs (all building costs including development)
- Financing costs
- Builder’s insurances
- Brokerage fees
- Landlord reserves
- Landlord risk
- Calculated profit margin of the investor