Bauexperte
2013-01-10 22:23:29
- #1
Hello Stefan,
Just because in this, our current form of society, the status of the "citizen who is always right" occupies a supposedly worthy position, your intention is not any better. And – dear Stefan – I have already answered your question more than once with this post.
They are not "my" Asians; as I understand it, they are people who happen to have been born on another continent. And – it was mostly about the inner-city area. But since Asians – when working in Europe – are paid differently than Europeans themselves, the question of price per sqm/usable area for them is different from that for Europeans. That is – btw. – one of the causes of the price increase in the real estate market in metropolitan areas.
Wrong. You could have decided at any time to remain a tenant. Even private or social housing construction must eventually generate returns.
"As I said, we never liked it and somehow it already seemed to me like a restriction of competition. We could not have bought the house without committing ourselves to this energy service provider for 10 years. I finally told this to a lawyer I am friends with. He, in turn, said he could easily imagine that this obligation is void for 2 reasons.
On the one hand, it allegedly contradicts EU legislation, according to which a free choice of the basic supplier must be possible. On the other hand, he sees tendencies toward a tied contract."
You signed "without" this knowledge and now do not want to make amendments later?
The alternative is "rental apartment," and your "ignorance" you could have clarified through a lawyer. Why didn’t you ask your lawyer friend beforehand?
You should be careful if you cannot substantiate your suspicions, because the notary was/is obligated to you, otherwise he would be criminally liable.
Wrong. I am sure that I make several mistakes per day/month/year; I cannot walk on water, nor do I have holes in my hands. Unlike you, apparently, I admit to them and do not try to find the guilty elsewhere.
I also have a multi-page expert opinion where a court-appointed expert has proven me "only" damages amounting to €5,000.00. Nevertheless, I lost the court case with five-figure euros at stake. A judge issues a verdict – not justice!
Mistake – every judge judges exactly as they slept the previous night. Mostly, the plaintiff has been lucky in the past and only rarely unlucky. And – thank Mother Nature – judges are slowly realizing that the plaintiff is not always the innocent lamb he tries to portray himself as.
I certainly will not do you that favor. If you want to continue discussing with me, then only publicly.
Kind regards
.....but that does not legitimize your very limited perspective on this topic as the only correct one.
Just because in this, our current form of society, the status of the "citizen who is always right" occupies a supposedly worthy position, your intention is not any better. And – dear Stefan – I have already answered your question more than once with this post.
In the price range between T€ 300 and T€ 400, however, "your" Asians do not seem to operate.
They are not "my" Asians; as I understand it, they are people who happen to have been born on another continent. And – it was mostly about the inner-city area. But since Asians – when working in Europe – are paid differently than Europeans themselves, the question of price per sqm/usable area for them is different from that for Europeans. That is – btw. – one of the causes of the price increase in the real estate market in metropolitan areas.
It only explains why our choice was also very limited and not as free as you depicted.
Wrong. You could have decided at any time to remain a tenant. Even private or social housing construction must eventually generate returns.
Who here is talking about unacceptable? Me? You would have to show me where I wrote that.
"As I said, we never liked it and somehow it already seemed to me like a restriction of competition. We could not have bought the house without committing ourselves to this energy service provider for 10 years. I finally told this to a lawyer I am friends with. He, in turn, said he could easily imagine that this obligation is void for 2 reasons.
On the one hand, it allegedly contradicts EU legislation, according to which a free choice of the basic supplier must be possible. On the other hand, he sees tendencies toward a tied contract."
Without this knowledge, even I would not currently want to judge whether it is coercion, tying, profiteering, or indeed a legally valid contract.
You signed "without" this knowledge and now do not want to make amendments later?
Well, as I said, initially out of lack of alternatives and certainly also out of ignorance.
The alternative is "rental apartment," and your "ignorance" you could have clarified through a lawyer. Why didn’t you ask your lawyer friend beforehand?
I would never have suspected that refunds and “crooked” price settings could occur in the background if such an agreement is approved by a notary, who, to my knowledge, also has a duty of examination.
You should be careful if you cannot substantiate your suspicions, because the notary was/is obligated to you, otherwise he would be criminally liable.
But I maintain that mistakes are not tolerated by you ;-)
Wrong. I am sure that I make several mistakes per day/month/year; I cannot walk on water, nor do I have holes in my hands. Unlike you, apparently, I admit to them and do not try to find the guilty elsewhere.
... Banks can sing long long songs about that.
I also have a multi-page expert opinion where a court-appointed expert has proven me "only" damages amounting to €5,000.00. Nevertheless, I lost the court case with five-figure euros at stake. A judge issues a verdict – not justice!
Whether you like it personally or not, there are many contracts in Germany that have later been declared void by courts. One may like it or not, but it reflects reality and I personally think it’s good that one is not necessarily unprotected against market power. That’s why we live in a social market economy.
Mistake – every judge judges exactly as they slept the previous night. Mostly, the plaintiff has been lucky in the past and only rarely unlucky. And – thank Mother Nature – judges are slowly realizing that the plaintiff is not always the innocent lamb he tries to portray himself as.
Ultimately, this public discussion about two different subjective opinions does not benefit anyone here – not even other forum participants. We can gladly continue to discuss this by private message, but I think the factual professional content should be the focus in the forum. ;-)
I certainly will not do you that favor. If you want to continue discussing with me, then only publicly.
Kind regards