Rohbau in order or defective? Experiences?

a typical example of cm planning, every row must be sawed and overlapping dimensions do not result. It requires an Oktanmeterplanung, thus 12.5cm and only multiples of that. Hardly any sawing work and precise execution.

Firstly, it doesn't go that fast, more like a week per floor. And with a mason like that, you have to be on the construction site daily or every other day. With such shoddy work, a demolition is also possible. It's always the entire row, not just a few individual bricks.

Cutting is done anyway in almost every row through openings (windows and doors). Therefore, this is the daily routine and actually not a problem with a proper installation plan. The problem is that nowadays masons jump from one construction site to another and no longer have time, and something like a real foreman who internally supervises all the work basically no longer exists. But yes, you are right, with proper planning you can keep and avoid such "predetermined breaking points" for botched work rather small.

What do the experts say?

I can only agree with Yilmaz’s opinion

The photos are awful! I would strongly advise staying away from this company.

(even if he probably meant that the construction shown in the photos is awful – but unfortunately the photos themselves are also quite awful, to a pretty similar degree, if you ask me).

With this tiny detail, you can practically do nothing. A serious answer is impossible.

Well, at least it makes it unnecessarily difficult. If it weren’t for the other readers, that alone would be reason enough for me not to respond.

With this tiny detail, you can practically do nothing. A serious answer is impossible.

For me, it is enough for a well-founded suspicion that the bricklayers are just as unrecommendable as the photographer.

Unfortunately, I don’t have more image material. It reassures me that based on the visible non-compliant measurements in the image parts, one cannot yet clearly say whether the company is excluded under any circumstances. That gives some hope. The architect has mostly worked with the company so far and is convinced of the quality.

It would already help if the photos were not turned into 70% bad photos. Your glimmer of hope is entirely a misunderstanding; avoid this company even more than the devil avoids holy water! As already noted, fantasy measurement planning often contributes significantly to such fake bricklayer jokes; thus, the architect can also be highly questionable. But it also happens that a mailbox general contractor changes its shell subcontractor and completely screws up (cf. the "Oli baut" videos or also here in the forum see R.Hotzenplotz).

With such botched work, a dismantling is possible too. It’s always the whole row, not just a few scattered stones.

With such thoroughly completed botchery, I certainly would not want to be the liability insurance carrier of the site manager. A dismantling would indeed be objectively highly warranted here, but legally completely disproportionate. This is a case for a damages lawsuit going through several instances and back. / eins80: who gave you the opportunity to see this reference?

Openings (windows and doors) are cut in almost every row anyway. Therefore, it’s daily bread and, with a laying plan, actually no problem.

What do you mean by laying plan there? – no, with proper planning even wall openings do not justify any cutting.

Does this happen more often nowadays and can still be considered normal, or does this definitely speak against the shell construction company?

Thanks to your terribly bad photo design botchery, it’s actually hard to say clearly, but unfortunately highly likely that the damage pattern here is substantially due to presumably not having engaged certified personnel as bricklayer performers. Normal in the sense of DIN standard it is absolutely not, but all the more normal in the sense of contemporary attitude toward clean working / normative force of the factual, meaning that norm-compliant masonry is on the way to rarity. But here it is still an ultra severe case.

The overlap dimension must be 0.4h. This is not the case at least at the marked points, I think I see even more, but that could also be due to the perspective.

I fully understand your objection. However, the row you marked is probably built with shuttering blocks and a ring beam poured into it. Therefore, it does not matter whether an overlap dimension is maintained at least in this row. It plays no role at all for the ring beam.

Again, I see no defect here whatsoever. Offset is present, insofar.

Although a dismantling would be objectively highly appropriate here, legally it is completely disproportionate

Well, if the whole house is already finished, then it is no longer proportionate, of course. Although even then it depends on the frequency of the faulty spots. At the frequency presumably present here, it certainly also has static implications and not just the risk of cracking.
However, I assume that someone checks there daily or every two days. And then it would definitely be proportionate to have a wall taken down and rebuilt if it is so defective.

What do you mean by laying plan

I mean that the master bricklayer sits down with the architect's plan and looks at where to lay which stones and how, so that he has to cut as little as possible and the overlapping dimensions are maintained. There are even programs for this with which you could then also order from the stone supplier.
Most people skip this. And of course, almost always cutting has to be done at openings, precisely because of the overlapping and because hardly any shell builder actually orders half bricks.

regardless of whether an overlapping dimension is at least maintained in this row

Ok, for the top row, if you want. That you also overlooked two further rows below without sufficient overlapping.