Responsibility of the architect in case of KfW interest and further matters

I have one more idea, maybe someone can correct me: Is the structural shell builder commissioned according to VOB? Was his offer based on the tendered quantities? Settlement of the actual quantities at the offered unit price?

The tender documentation states: "1. The VOB applies in the version valid at the time of bidding."
Furthermore:
"2. The bidder is obliged to inform himself about the location and planning of the construction project. Documents can be inspected after arrangement with the client or planner. Claims due to ignorance of the location and planning are excluded."

The structural shell builder was also on site before contract signing, the architect informed us.

Also in the tender documentation:
Excavation for slab foundation
to be carried out according to profile, including
rough grading.

Take over excavation as property of the contractor and
remove it from the construction site, including rough grading,
disposal at an approved landfill or disposal site. Proof of proper
disposal must be provided. Landfill and disposal costs are to be included.

Excavation from ground surface,
excavation depth up to 0.80 m.
Soil class 4 and 5.

34 m³ unit price.............. total price..............

The structural shell builder entered 150,- under unit price and 5100,- under total price.

Try my approach. 150e means transporting the excavation with pack animals. He should have known that as an architect. Ask him what reasons justify this expensive disposal.

I have already sent this by email on Friday and again today after his response, since he did not reply to it. His response:

"Hello Mrs. x, Hello Mr. x,

I have taken note of your dissatisfaction. I will inform Mr. Rohbauer that he will not carry out any further earthworks for the time being and that he should inform us early about any additional claims or significantly deviating quantities. Furthermore, I will address Mr. Rohbauer’s price for item 02.0.002 'Excavation for the base slab,' as the volume has increased significantly and a discount on this item may be possible.

Mr. older architect and I are currently working on an updated cost estimate. Furthermore, we are in the process of reviewing the offers. So far, we have noticed that the quantity for the lighting fixtures (33 pieces) in the electrical installation work should be reviewed. We would also review or delete item 3.013 smoke detectors. In the offer for sanitary and heating work, we would remove the title Demolition work (2,108€ net), as there are no demolition works pending. Additionally, we would delete items 04.007, 04.008, 04.010, and 04.011, as these works will be performed by the screed layer (4,410€ net)."

-> Dissatisfaction is good... But nothing changes... And WE had already pointed out the spots several times. But okay, different topic.

How should I proceed best here? Ask for a reason again? It will be that he has no idea what usual prices are, that he didn’t pay attention or something like that. But of course, he can’t write that.

The cost estimate obviously only exists at the time of awarding the contract (service phase 7)

Mea culpa. Of course, I actually meant cost calculation.

But whether it actually turns out to be more substantial with the architect than the estimate, I dare to doubt.

Here he at least has to advance to the 2nd level of cost structuring and determine quantities as well as prices. These can then also be easily checked by "laypersons."

In the end, it costs what it costs.

It certainly does. The clarity is provided earlier. "Continuing as before" will surely lead to a fiasco.

but the train has left the station in your case

For the awarded trades. If you want to achieve the "turnaround": better now than never.

questions?

Temporarily erase that word from your vocabulary. You no longer ask, but demand and require.

Have you actually checked the quantities for plausibility? If I remember correctly, a two-storey extension with 68m² is being built. At an excavation depth of 80cm, 34m³ would correspond to a base area of 42.5m².

Even if I now assume that the base area of the extension is exactly 42.5m² and someone did not take into account that one always excavates a little more all around and additionally excavated 20cm deeper, in the end you might end up in the area of 65m³, but certainly not at 96m³.

Or is there already something additional included here, such as excavation for the garage foundations or the like?

"Continuing as before" will surely be a fiasco." I agree with that!

So far, no trades have been awarded, only the shell construction. Thank God...

Possibly excavation has already been done in the driveway area, at least there is another item "lime sandstone gravel distributed in the driveway area." In the garage area, to my knowledge, nothing has been excavated yet. The height was at the level of the neighboring property before construction started and still is now. According to this strange overview, the garage area has already been excavated.