Notarial Purchase Agreement - No Guarantee for Building Land

What exactly is common and what is not, I cannot assess, but it is certainly possible to agree in the notarial contract on the developability (possibly further specified, such as a single-family house with 2 full floors, etc.) as a condition without the seller providing a guarantee for it. In connection with this, a right of withdrawal from the purchase can and should be agreed upon. This can also be given an expiration date, which then allows you to process your preliminary building inquiry or even building application.

If the seller is reputable and has no skeletons in the closet, they should have no problem agreeing to such a clause in the contract. Of course, the more precisely you define your developability, the less likely it is that the seller will accept this, since ultimately the building authority decides – therefore, stick to the minimum that can be derived from the development plan.

but it is certainly possible to agree on the buildability (possibly even more precisely specified, such as a single-family house with 2 full floors, etc.) as a condition in the notarial contract without the seller assuming a guarantee for it. In connection with this, a right of withdrawal from the purchase can and should be agreed upon.

So it is then a guarantee after all, upon whose non-fulfillment the withdrawal occurs.

If the seller is reputable and has no skeletons in the closet, one should have no problem agreeing to such a clause in the contract.

No. The seller has no reason to do so. He wants to sell his building land that is located within the scope of a valid development plan. I do not give a guarantee for any wishes of the buyer. That is beyond usual practice.

therefore leave it at the minimum that can be derived from the development plan.

Then I can also waive a guarantee if the development plan is available.

Once again: Such a guarantee is NOT customary when normal building land with a development plan is sold. It does not even exist with large project developments. According to the Building Code §8, the development plan is explicitly defined as legally binding.
What more could one want than a legal and enforceable guarantee from the state?

If one wants a 200% guarantee, then one must express one’s wishes to the building authority and submit a building inquiry. With exclusively planning law questions, almost any private person can do this in almost all federal states – as is the case here.

No, a guarantee has other, additional legal consequences, therefore the seller would be foolish to agree. Notarial language is precise language. As mentioned before, whether usual or unusual, I cannot assess. Here with us, we have stipulated exactly as described above in the land contract. The seller obviously has an interest in carrying out the sale, so of course he should also make compromises – as long as they do not cross his red lines.

First of all: Thank you very much for the numerous contributions. What still surprises me, however, is that the notary speaks here of something unusual when such a guarantee is missing. The risk that still exists: the plot of land is not exactly the one in that location in the development plan. In fact, the development plan uses other parcel numbers and the plots have not yet been subdivided. By pure estimation, it is clearly this plot of land and included in the development plan. If all parties (seller, buyer, and building authority) are mistaken, then without a guarantee no one is liable, or the buyer remains stuck with it. The probability of this risk occurring is of course very low, but greater than zero. However, the seller sells at a building land price without guaranteeing the fact that it is building land.

Has the division been legally reviewed for compatibility with the development plan? If not, this should be ensured first and foremost, and I would definitely not waive the clause regarding buildability (and setback areas or easements). It doesn’t have to be called a guarantee; presumably the notary did not use this wording per se either. Otherwise, I would not want to touch the property (but just because I wouldn’t do that doesn’t mean you should do the same…)

The risk that still exists: The plot is not exactly the one at that spot in the development plan. In fact, the development plan uses different parcel numbers and the plots have not yet been divided. By pure estimation, it is clearly this plot and included in the development plan. If everyone (seller, buyer, and building authority) is mistaken, no one has to guarantee it, or the buyer is left holding the bag.

Either the plot is within the scope of the development plan or not. That has nothing to do with estimation. Just post the documents here.

Regardless of the seller, we have researched and contacted the municipality. The plot is a building gap and part of a development plan, which is also publicly accessible.

... so what now? And if it is a building gap, meaning there are houses to the right and left and otherwise a built-up area, at worst it is a §34 area. So what. Assume that YOU have to swallow the bitter pill. The seller won’t do it. My experience. P.S. What stops you from submitting a three-line preliminary building inquiry? THAT would be the only option I would give you as a seller. To give you time to check.