Procedure for Overriding Right with Load - Bavaria

Isn't this just an acknowledgment of receipt of the information obligation? No consent? We lived in Schwabing, Munich a few years ago and were often informed with such a letter about deliveries by crane, as the courtyards could not be developed otherwise.

Isn't that just a confirmation of acknowledgment of the duty to inform? No consent?

You can then also object. It then ends as in the judgment.

How would you proceed?

Quite simply grant the right of way. The probability of a construction accident is extremely low and also insured. The probability of a stupid neighborly start is very high if not approved.

P.S. Google accidents involving crane slewing in the context of single-family house new constructions. You will be surprised at how little you find. There are extremely few reports (at most, a mobile crane might tip over, but no one loses anything).

I once asked ChatGPT. Prompt: "How many houses have been damaged in the last 25 years because a crane lost a load while swinging over?" The answer did not contain a single incident.

My concern is only that when elements are hanging on the crane, it is not swung over our house. As for the garden, as I said, I am completely relaxed. [...] Then we will formulate the confirmation so that swinging over the building should be avoided if possible, but the garden may be used for swinging over.

Simply grant the swinging right. The likelihood of a construction accident is extremely low and also insured. The likelihood of a stupid neighborly start is very high if not approved.

The neighbor should show in a to-scale drawing where the crane stands and what the crane’s swinging area is. Then it can be seen where it would swing over the garden or house. The weight of a wall panel in case of a fall is effective with a factor of 1, regardless of how low the probability of this is. Statistics are for actuaries; in case of damage, the feared event is fully evaluated. Hence my suggestion to coordinate accordingly so that the house is empty of people in case of danger and only material would suffer.

You can also object then. It will end up like in the judgment.

A substantiated objection would have to be considered by the court and subsequently override a "I complain just because I can" refuser, but also appropriately weigh danger and effort to avoid a worst-case scenario. So no one has to endure being crushed just because the neighbor also has rights.