Massive problems with the builder - is contract termination possible?

Hello,
a lot of circumstances have come together here. I can only give you some general advice. First of all, it is always important to remain calm. Getting out of a contract for work and services is not easy in Germany! Judges in Germany are always obliged to mediate in such cases. Of course, a property developer also has a duty to inform. You cannot expect a layperson to have expert knowledge. (No offense!) Just as a site manager has. How do you want to get rid of the property developer if you are still in a planning phase? The living area should already be fixed in writing. The evidence is very difficult in that regard. Nothing is possible without a lawyer and an expert! And those cost money! I am not allowed to say more here! I wish you good luck!

Hello, a lot of circumstances have come together here. I can only give you some general tips. First of all, it always counts to stay calm. Getting out of a contract for work and services is not easy in Germany! Judges in Germany are always required to mediate in such cases. Of course, a property developer also has a duty to inform. You cannot expect a layperson to have expert knowledge like a construction manager does. How do you want to get rid of the property developer if you are still in the planning phase? The evidence situation is very difficult there. Only a lawyer and an expert can help you with that. And they do cost money! That's all I am allowed to say here! I wish you good luck!

I think that in the construction industry, simply a different wind is blowing than in other industries. As a graduate engineer for automotive suppliers, I could not allow myself something like that. We would possibly have lost a major automotive customer, which would mean half ruin. Since most people, if at all, only build once in their lifetime, it is almost irrelevant whether the customer is satisfied or not. I will definitely not recommend the company!

The fault is not solely to be found in the industry here. The customer simply has to know what they are signing. And I think many just cannot assess that. I do not exclude myself... we also trusted, and fortunately did not lose money. Many points in the contract had to be explained to us again and again.

Hello,

In a conversation, the developer said it would be more expensive because of the soil survey, the static calculation, which had not yet been done at that time, and the crack width limitation. For me, a WU basement is a WU basement. Why it should now be more expensive because of the static calculation or crack width limitation, I don't understand.

Every basement builder has to pay attention to possible crack widths; if a WU concrete basement is required, even more so. Every reasonable builder only calculates the static once the approval-free building permit is available. That is clear so far - but it should not require this surcharge; especially not with the size of the house and thus also the basement.

The only thing that comes to mind here is that the sale price was calculated incorrectly from the beginning and the proportionality is now to be restored ... if, as written, earthworks are not hidden in the offer price. Then the amount adds up quickly.

The house is 9m x 10m.
The original bricks were 30 cm Poroton and have now increased to 36.5 cm due to KFW70. I would not have thought that this makes so much difference in living space and it should have been pointed out beforehand, as we explicitly wished for 145 sqm. The BF would not have been violated if the house had been made larger on the outside. But of course, that saves money...

At a continuous 6.5 cm less, quite a bit adds up, but it can by no means be about 11 sqm in total.

For your information: wishes and reality often differ greatly. What counts exclusively is what is stated in your contract and the associated floor plans.

As a graduate engineer, you cannot be stupid – therefore my recommendation: before construction finally begins, sit down at a table with all responsible parties and try to discuss the status quo objectively. ONLY then, if you do not find a solution acceptable to you through this conversation, should you seek further help; e.g. in the form of a lawyer specializing in contract/building law. And for heaven’s sake, do not make any rash ultimatums in the conversation with your provider, if you want to take my advice. Clarify any possible consequences beforehand with concentrated expert knowledge!

Rhenish regards

Hi

for us it is similar for Kfw 70. Went from 30cm to 36.5cm aerated concrete. Already at the beginning of the planning as a modification of a building plan, which had already been implemented by the developer elsewhere and served as a template. In order to keep the interior space, the increase was added outward. The base plate becomes slightly larger and the roof overhang of 60 cm is smaller by 6.5cm, so expensive changes in the roof area can be avoided. The additional cost for this was a few thousand euros, close to 2,000 Eur, fair.

We build on a base plate, so that the poorly insurable ground in our case does not matter. Additional costs arose due to insufficient soil strength and resulting more gravel under the house as well as due to filling the terrain to the desired height above the street to prevent swamp conditions. That quickly adds up to 5,000 EUR. And you only realize that after a soil survey and detailed planning.

Generally speaking, it is easy to get out of a contract for work if you pay the contractual partner their planned profit, about 10% of the construction sum. If you do not want to do that, you have to prove a defect so serious that continuing the contract is unreasonable. Just google Werkvertrag etc. At the current stage of planning this will be very difficult.

So really don’t lose your nerve, sit down at a table and close the gap between expectation and reality together.
If there is complete ignorance and mistrust against the developer, buy in external expertise, possibly through [Bauherren-Schutzbund]. Also google here.