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

I can only repeat myself. Responsibility and decision-making cannot be delegated. It is like in the private sector. Just because you, as a board member, have a project manager for a project, you decide, not the project manager. The project manager is only there for coordination and lays all the facts on the table for you. If you knew the €150 per cubic meter before execution, you made the wrong decision. If not, then [Fachanwalt].

The question is, did you know the price in advance? And that also has nothing to do with an incorrect cost estimate.

That is another matter!

I can only repeat myself. Responsibility and decision-making cannot be delegated. It is like in the private sector. Just because you have a project manager for a project as a board member, you decide, not the project manager. The project manager is only there for coordination and lays all the facts on the table for you. If you knew the 150€ per cubic meter before execution, you made the wrong decision. If not, then consult a specialist lawyer.

The question is, did you know the price in advance?

We knew the TOTAL price in advance. Chronologically:
- 4.12.18 morning: Meeting with the old architect due to the finally available building permit. He talks about an offer with the structural builder xy (no others for comparison). We ask whether, due to the good order situation, this is a high price and are irritated that there is no comparison offer, although it was agreed with the architect. The old architect denies this and emphasizes that he had already worked with the structural builder a few times. 70,000 EUR is quite ok. We do not see a bill of quantities and do not get one to take home or sent to us.

- 4.12.18 noon: We send a meeting note to the young and old architect (because they never take notes and always forget half): "It is expected that construction company xy will be commissioned with the shell construction. The old architect will try again to negotiate the price a bit, as Mr. Structural Builder already signaled that this is not yet set in stone [Note: Did not happen]. A meeting is scheduled for Monday, 10.12., 2:30 p.m.

- 10.12.18: Meeting of the architects, structural builder and me at the construction site. Only a rough inspection. No renegotiation of the price as announced.

19.12.18: We receive the construction contract and discount agreements by post from the architect. Under point 4 Remuneration (according to Paragraph 2 VOB/B) it says: "As remuneration for the service designated in No. 1, the provisional sum of (...) total contract sum 70,163.01 EUR is agreed." No further breakdown.

2nd calendar week 19: Start of construction

23.1.19: We receive by email the 1st partial invoice for the shell construction from the young architect, which arrived with him on 18.1. Due to the discount agreement, we pay the next day.

25.1.19: After repeated inquiries, we receive the price sheet of the structural builder by email. It is here that we first see the 150 euros per cubic meter.

The rest is known...

I read through it. You just let the architect do whatever they wanted. You simply don't carry anything out if you don't know the details. Block it until you are fully informed. That turned out badly.

Ok, we will keep this in mind for the following trades. Absolutely. Even if it means that we have to study the offers for a week first.

I just spoke to a lawyer through my legal expenses insurance. He sees 3 problems with the shell builder:
1. How did the triple amount of soil excavation occur? The young architect writes today: "Mr. Shell Builder had orally informed me during a site inspection that the volume of earthworks exceeded the tendered volume. I only learned the exact quantity with the first interim invoice. I instructed Mr. Shell Builder yesterday to inform us early about additional claims / quantity overruns. As I already wrote to you yesterday, I will still address the price with Mr. Shell Builder again. The quantity increased, among other things, because Mr. Shell Builder needed a gravelled staging area for the crane. Due to the excavation and gravelling of the garage access, costs in the area of gardening and landscaping are eliminated."

2. Why was this not foreseeable? (There were site inspections, for the excavator the top soil layer is decisive)

3. Why were we not informed immediately? The shell builder called me on January 12th that the construction power does not work when the crane runs on stage 3. The issue with the soil in the excavator area must have occurred shortly before. Since this was not listed in the bill of quantities, information would have been necessary here. But nothing came.

Regarding 1 & 2. Because no one thought about it. Neither the shell constructor nor the architect. This falls under "Do we need a construction road or a secured crane area". What do you want to hear now? I’m an office person/ construction layman and thought about the topic because I read numerous homeowner blogs before starting. One of our neighbors had to have a construction pit/ slope stabilization built over 10m and that for "nuts" because the steel reinforcement is removed again after backfilling the cellar. It cost him 15k€. Nobody cared that no one thought about it! Now there is an additional financing. I also had clarified what happens if the scaffolding, the crane, the meter cabinet, the toilet, etc. have to stay longer?

Have you clarified something like that? All 4 positions can additionally cost you 1000€ per month. Do you have that on your radar?

Regarding 3. Communication problems and an inexperienced architect? Why did you agree to be supervised by a graduate? I would have immediately withdrawn the commission from the architect.

Regarding point 3: We did not agree to that. We concluded the contract with the architectural firm (at that time a one-man operation). A short time later, we were presented with a fait accompli that his new employee (and former intern) would be taking care of our project.