Property search in Bonn. Questions about property acquisition.

Hello forum members,

after having been searching for a suitable construction method and supervision for a while and having spoken to some companies in this context, I am rather more insecure than at the beginning!

I want to have a house built for my son near Bonn. For this purpose, I have been looking for suitable building plots on various real estate portals. As a rule, the interesting plots are offered by developers. Here is my first question: some providers said that you can only get the advertised plot in connection with building a house from the company and that you should first sign a contract. Others want at least a consultation before they release the detailed data about the plot. Is this procedure even legal? And if I sign such a contract, can I withdraw from it free of charge if I don’t want the offered plots? (Not from the companies' point of view, because that is probably not possible or only limited, but from the legal side).

The next topic that made me very suspicious is the price structure. When I look at the available offers, the price per m² of living space varies from €1,340.00 to almost €1,700.00. Depending on the provider, somewhat more or fewer services are included, but not so significantly. For example, for one provider, the foundation survey is included, and supposedly better materials are used. Now I read somewhere on the internet that building a house in solid construction (standard gable without a basement with medium equipment, 120-140m² living space) no company costs more than €980.00 / m² in equity capital without VAT. Accordingly, the "gross profit" for the companies would be between approx. €150.00 and €500.00 per m². How can this be justified?

One provider explained to us that the basic house is not expensive, but the selection of equipment by most builders leads to considerable additional costs, which is why they do not prescribe the equipment features but work with budgets. Here, as a customer, I can decide myself how expensive my tiles or bathrooms would be. If you now deduct the packages, the actual house would not really be expensive. - I found the idea very interesting, and indeed the actual house is not "that expensive" then. Unfortunately, this provider is rather in the upper middle range, even with the equipment package variant.

Ultimately, I now face the question of whether it would even make sense to develop "our" house in cooperation with an architect and then handle the tendering process ourselves via construction supervision. That would be like the equipment package of one provider but covering all parts of the house construction.

What, in your opinion, is a sensible approach? Developer, who then also takes on the warranty, or construction supervision, where I might have to chase after my requirements with x different companies myself?

One more thing about security (I also found interesting). Almost all companies offer various builder protection packages. In my opinion, some are not worth the paper they are written on. Only three of the companies work in this area with renowned companies. However, some of the packages are additionally chargeable. One of the companies at least includes the builder insurances (liability, etc.) as well as a warranty insurance with TÜV or DEKRA monitoring in the basic price of the house. But a completion insurance is also chargeable. Another company included a construction guarantee from R+V. If a developer, should one definitely take such a package, right?!?

I am currently unable to see the forest for the trees.

Ideas, suggestions, help??? ;-)

Many thanks and sunny days.

G. Heymann

According to this, the "gross profit" for companies would be between approximately €150.00 and €500.00 per m². How can this be justified?

.. oh great .... by that logic, prefabricated house manufacturers and developers would be swimming in immeasurable wealth .... forget it .... the competition in this industry is abundant and cutthroat ...

Ultimately, I am now faced with the question of whether it would even make sense to develop "our" house in collaboration with an architect and then conduct the tendering myself through construction supervision

.. depends on the right architect and thus also the site manager ... building will be considerably more expensive but also better (if the architect is good) because you can decide everything yourself, but you also pay accordingly ....

I can no longer see the forest for the trees.

.. yes, that's how it is ... for non-experts, an immense and unfamiliar universe opens up .... why not ask "Bauexperte," our moderator, for help ...

Hello,

the "language" of the internet is "Du" :D

I want to build a house near Bonn for my son. For this, I have looked for suitable building plots via various real estate portals. Usually, the interesting plots are offered by developers. Here is my first question, some providers said that the advertised plot can only be obtained in connection with building a house from the company....

That's how I work too. If I have been able to option a plot - which is difficult enough since the landowners usually think they can do better on their own - I also want to be rewarded with the house construction. I am not a realtor but a construction supervisor.

and you should first sign a contract. Others want at least a consultation before giving out detailed data on the plot. Is this procedure even permitted?

Signing a contract before viewing the plot is borderline and I would never do that in your position. A consultation gives sellers insight into whether the effort of a site visit is worthwhile! Both legitimate => free market economy.

And if I sign such a contract, can I withdraw from it free of charge if I don't want the offered plots? (Not from the company’s perspective, because that might not be possible or only limited, but legally).

As I wrote above, I would not do that in your place.

The legal side - I am not a lawyer and therefore cannot give legal advice; in Germany this is exclusively reserved for consulting professions - looks like this: you can only withdraw from such a contract if a right of withdrawal is formulated and included in the contract.

The next topic that puzzled me greatly is the price structure. Looking at the available offers, the prices per sqm of living space range from €1,340.00 to almost €1,700.00. Depending on the provider, somewhat more or fewer services are included but not so significant. For example, one provider includes the foundation survey and uses supposedly better materials.

I hope you can really read a building specification (BB)? What is not stated is considered not purchased!

You can assume that a valuable single-family house of the KfW 70 efficiency house category, built solidly, requires about €1,500.00/sqm living space. Soil surveys are not included in the sqm price/living space.

Now I read somewhere online that building a house in solid construction (standard gable without basement with medium equipment, 120-140 sqm living space) does not cost a company more than €980.00 / sqm with own equity, excluding VAT. Accordingly, the "gross margin" for companies would be between approx. €150.00 and €500.00 per sqm. How can this be explained?

With the commercial duty to manage carefully and thus secure the company's existence as long as possible?

One provider explained to us that it is not the basic house that is expensive, but the selection of equipment by most builders leads to significant additional costs, which is why they do not prescribe features, but work with budgets.

With area code 067xx?

Here, as a customer, I can decide myself how expensive my tiles or bathrooms will be. If you subtract the packages, the actual house is not really expensive - I found this idea very interesting and, indeed, the actual house is not that "expensive." Unfortunately, this provider belongs rather to the upper middle field, even with the equipment package variant.

I can imagine which provider you mean; still, the seller's statement is only partly correct. It is true that you can sink a lot of euros into the equipment and this can drive the final price to unforeseen heights. But it depends on your self-discipline how far the budget increase ultimately goes.

How much money are you willing to invest?

Much more important is the choice of really important components when building a single-family house: how thick is the slab, what bricks are used, how is the roof constructed, which windows are used, which technology... and so on. Which craftsmen are used, how the construction is supervised, what securities the provider offers... etc. And very important: how is the consultation and how is it handled after signing the contract? The range within these components goes from cheap to absolutely high-priced and only becomes noticeable after moving in.

Ultimately, I am now facing the question of whether it might even make sense to develop "our" house together with an architect and then do the tendering myself via construction supervision. That would be like the equipment package of one provider, but applied to all parts of the house construction.

No, that is a typical misjudgment.

When awarding via an architect - which does not mean that this is a bad choice - you have to tender all trades at least 3 times and have corresponding knowledge if you do not want to be completely dependent on the architect's welfare. The equipment packages only concern "merely" parts of the interior finishing; except for the complete electrical trade, if I remember correctly.

A serious disadvantage of awarding via an architect is that he cannot guarantee a fixed price for you; then he would be liable and legally considered a general contractor. You create the floor plans with him and based on that, he draws up a first rough cost estimate. This cost estimate only becomes more concrete as more tender documents are returned. So there remains the residual risk that the planned budget will be exceeded by factor "x."

What do you think is a sensible approach? A developer who also enters into warranty or construction supervision, where I may have to chase my claims at x different companies myself?

A developer means you acquire house and plot from a single source and pay the price in a maximum of 7 stages. You can influence the floor plans, the rest is done by the developer; so more or less relaxed leaning back.

Classic construction supervision - and I do not mean providers operating nationally or their salespeople - takes this work off your hands. This is how we work, for example. We/our architect first look at the plot and then clarify the building law. Afterwards, we conduct consultation talks and in the next step plan the floor plan with our architect. During the time needed to create the drafts, we decide among our potential contractors - based on distance to the construction site and full books - which contractor should build. With the second drafts, we usually present a fixed price offer; after the first draft, changes are mostly still made. Hitting the mark perfectly is very rare. Classic construction supervision accompanies a building project from the first meeting to moving in and - if all goes well - beyond. We live on recommendations ;)

One more thing about security (I also found interesting). Almost all companies offer various builder protection packages. I consider some not even worth the paper they are written on.

I can confirm that!

Only three companies work in this area with renowned companies. Some packages are additionally chargeable. One company at least included builder insurances (liability etc.) as well as a warranty insurance with TÜV or DEKRA supervision in the base price of the house. But a completion insurance is also chargeable. Another company included a construction guarantee of R+V. If developer, should one definitely take such a package then?!

Securities are - besides independent financing advice - the "A" and "O" when building a single-family house. Even if you decide on awarding via an architect, you should draw up proper contracts with every single craftsman... including penalty clauses! And - despite possible security packages, involving independent expertise is always worth considering!

Rhineland regards

Hello,

you already did the first thing right. You are skeptical and question what is being said.
I am writing to you here as a builder, someone who has already made a decision about who to build with.

First of all, about these bundled offers.... it’s legal, and the state is happy about a very high property transfer tax. Because it’s applied to the total price, not just the land. Apart from that, I find this method lousy and would never build with such a company, no matter how good the land is. Exploiting lack of space to bind customers can only go wrong. Because afterwards you have no negotiation room, you have to build with the company.
You also rightly noted that at least €1500 per sqm will be due. But only for the house. Additional construction costs probably come extra.
What a company earns on a house is irrelevant to you as a customer. You have to pay what is on the invoice. I do doubt, however, that too much remains with reputable companies. At the moment they sure live well and can invest, but the time after the construction boom will come.

You can basically forget all that marketing nonsense; only ruthless comparison of the construction performance descriptions and asking about extra charges helps.
The more precisely you can tell the seller your wishes BEFORE signing, the more accurate the offer can be.
With my company, it is also possible to visit the model exhibition beforehand, and if you’re lucky, even guided, and you can ask directly about extra charges.
We definitely created an Excel list and compared the individual points in the construction performance description. You don’t always find matching items because different vocabulary is often used.

In the end, what mattered to us was the gut feeling and recommendations from builders we partly know personally, and others whom we visited on the construction sites (arranged by the seller).

It is also important to keep an eye on the surrounding costs. And how should a layman see in a construction performance description what items are missing? For example, we were surprised that we had to organize and pay for construction electricity/water and street closure ourselves. Just like that, €1500. If there are several such items, a cheap offer can quickly become more expensive than maybe a mid-range price.

We had almost everything done from a single source, everything where warranty cases could later arise. Wallpaper and floors in the dry rooms we did ourselves.

There is only one thing I would now recommend, although everything went smoothly for us: an external construction supervisor. They are simply more objective and can argue quite differently. Normally this role should be taken by our site manager, but that was a dope without guts who was afraid to report defects, which I then did myself.

.. it depends on the right architect and therefore also the construction manager ... building will become significantly more expensive but also better (if the architect is appropriate) because you can decide everything yourself, but you also pay accordingly ....

But that is also wrong. It depends on which service phases of the architect you use. If it is all of them, it becomes more expensive. However, above all, the phase of construction supervision is much more extensive, which drives the price.

That is wrong though.

.. that is not wrong, that is absolutely right .. what exactly do the service phases of the HOAI have to do with it? You should read my post very, very carefully again .. thank you