Laying parquet, in which direction?

@ KlaRa, the developer argues that the standard floor for you is laminate. When installing it, the sinter layer does not have to be removed; if I had booked tiles and parquet work for you, the layer would have been removed. But since I wanted the floor as a self-performed task, I do not benefit from that. Here, the lawyer would have to get involved again, but that has already cost me enough delay and trouble. No matter how they settle it, according to my sense of justice, the screed work has not been properly performed. Best regards, Frank

@ "werschtl":
Now one could surely accuse me of also having the technical overview in this situation you described.
The builder’s note is simply nonsense!
The builder or later buyer naturally has the right to a defect-free screed (or a defect-free screed surface). Which form of flooring installation is applied, whether floating or fully glued, is completely irrelevant!
You might even come up with the idea after several years to replace the currently planned laminate floor with a (glued) carpet, ceramic tiles, or (glued) parquet.
And who would then pay for the necessary additional effort? Right: YOU.
But at the moment, from my point of view, it is not yet clarified whether the screed surface is actually defective. The photos do not clearly show this; it must be checked on site!
My suggestion: find a specialist near you to have this checked.
This could be, for example, a master parquet fitter, which is where I would personally lean towards.
He will charge a small fee for his services, but these costs will be significantly less than a legal dispute (with an uncertain outcome).
Rule of thumb at this point: A lawyer has very rarely helped to solve a technical problem. In many cases, they have only opened up further problem areas.
------------------------
Best regards: KlaRa

Thank you very much, yes, I see it exactly the same way. I am in a favorable situation, the developer has also rejected my notice of defects in writing. Therefore, I am proceeding with substitute performance (defect rectification by a third party). I will then deduct the invoice from the last installment. With the lawyer, that is probably true ....

Best regards Frank

Hello "werschtl".
Caution trap, was what people used to say. This also applies to your case now.
Because later, when it comes to being able to sue for costs, you bear the burden of proof regarding a fact whose evidence you have logically destroyed through substitute performance.
Here it is only about legally documenting the ACTUAL situation.
Also for your own protection, because I will gladly repeat it for the 3rd time now:
The defect must first be proven.
But only a professional can do this. I had already recommended the master parquet layer. Ideally, you would enlist the help of a publicly appointed expert for "floor technology" or "screeds". The costs incurred for such an examination and assessment with a short report are certainly proportionate to the legal certainty you would gain from such a statement. If the expert does not assume a defect, the proportionality would also be maintained because it would save you from unnecessary costs of a dispute with the builder.
Because currently – I only remind you – there is only a statement from a tiler whose expertise I cannot vouch for.
With these hints, I only want to save you from steps that could possibly develop into an “own goal” later on!!!
Experts in the aforementioned fields can be found by asking the "Expertise Department" at the local Chamber of Industry and Commerce (IHK) or Chamber of Crafts (HWK). That's a phone call, nothing more.
-------------------------------------
Regards: KlaRa