Screed uneven - defect removal refused

This is the normal four-eyes principle and common practice everywhere. One structural engineer plans/calculates, another reviewing structural engineer approves it. One architect plans, another A/Expert approves it. Both can do the same, but are responsible for different phases so that one does not approve what they themselves have planned.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

Dirk was faster

And yes, I still don't understand what this is supposed to achieve – it has nothing to do with the number of posts nor with the number of posts I have read. One can certainly still come up with factual arguments – so why become unobjective now?

I wouldn’t know where I became unobjective? Just because I reminded you that you have already written/read many posts with different content and, admittedly, I assumed that your synapses are working? There is truly enough information about BV to be found on the forum; with very different users’ experiences.

Rhenish greetings

@Dirk:

A structural engineer for approval is present in large construction projects – in the single-family house sector, you hardly ever find one. And likewise, a four-eyes principle with architect-led construction – of course, you CAN do that and it certainly doesn’t hurt – except that it costs money. But it is not a rule and even experts tell you that having an expert involved throughout all service phases is rather unnecessary (I asked two experts beforehand).

But to present it as if the four-eyes principle is the rule? Sorry, that does not correspond to reality...

: I didn’t accuse you of being unprofessional either, it was meant with a wink because you said you couldn’t justify it objectively anymore.

This forum feels like it’s 90% general contractor / construction management or construction supervision contracts, and in those cases, having an expert ALWAYS makes sense – for architect-led construction, you practically never hear anything about that (in terms of construction supervision).

There is a structural engineer for large construction projects – in the single-family home sector you hardly ever find one

That's true; we currently have one of these special cases

: I didn’t accuse you of any partiality either, it was meant with a wink because you said you could no longer justify it objectively.

It read differently to me, that’s why I asked. Factual arguments... just the fact that supervising architects check their own work should be argument enough.

This forum has, roughly speaking, about 90% only general contractor/general planner or construction management clients, and a surveyor ALWAYS makes sense there – with architect-led construction you practically never read anything about that (in terms of construction supervision).

If you take a look at the site of the Architects’ Chamber NRW, you will see that there are quite a few legal disputes concerning architects as well. Which is not surprising, since people are certainly not robots and do make mistakes.

I stand by it – in my experience a surveyor always makes sense; no matter who the contractor is. When awarding via an architect, not even with additional costs since the service phases are simply divided.

Rhenish regards

All good - everyone has their own opinion. I do not share it for the reasons stated above.

All good - everyone has their opinion. I do not share it for the reasons mentioned above

I do.