House raised higher than approved; additional costs after approval?

Basically, a house that is built contrary to the building permit again has a significant defect. Therefore, legal and expert advice on acceptance is urgently required. In my opinion, such a defect (if it can be proven) is suitable to completely refuse acceptance. A scratch on the front door, on the other hand, is not sufficiently disproportionate, e.g.

: Do you know how well the other construction sites are running and whether there could be similar problems?

The BT currently has several construction sites running, we have inspected some of them, apparently the houses are being completed. [...] We just want to be able to roughly estimate what might be coming our way.

I can foresee that the municipality might impose fines on the BT or even order the demolition or significant modifications (e.g., making the roof pitch flatter to comply with the ridge height on a higher house), and that could financially strain the BT, which in the worst case might prevent the completion of the house. Having several construction sites running does not automatically mean that the BT is financially sound without concern. With many of these modern hybrid BT-GUs, I have the impression that their creditworthiness is not sufficiently capital-backed and therefore hangs by a thread, with their ongoing income essentially keeping their credit line alive alone. You don't easily recover from major setbacks like that; the profit margins are not that fat. In the worst case, you end up disputing with an insolvency administrator about flawless completion. With what guarantee has the BT secured that the house will actually be delivered in the end exactly as it was sold?

Having various construction sites underway does not automatically mean that the financial health of the BT is beyond question. With many of these modern hybrid BT-GUs, I have the impression that their creditworthiness is not sufficiently capital-backed and therefore hangs by a thread, with their ongoing income practically keeping their credit line alive on its own.

Several properties can also run through several GmbHs; if one of them goes bankrupt because of something like that, the others continue.

One would have to cautiously inquire about the other construction sites.

Several houses can also be managed through several GmbHs; if one of them goes bankrupt because of something like that, the others continue. You would have to very cautiously inquire around the other construction sites.

Yes indeed, my developer also said not to be surprised about a new GmbH, his son would be joining... I felt uneasy.

The client is the builder. He has to mess around with the building authority. The house, if otherwise okay, is not defective just because it is a bit too tall. But what you all call "slightly sloping" over there in [Dunkeldeutschland], phew, 1.70m....