Should the house be planned by a general contractor or architects?

Another advantage of the GU: in case of defects, you may have 2 companies to approach. With us, after 2 years, the entire house had to be replastered due to defects. The plastering company was by then insolvent. If the trades had been contracted independently, the costs would have remained with us. Thus, they have to be borne by the GU.

Another advantage of the GU: in case of defects, you potentially have two companies you can approach.
In our case, after 2 years due to defects, the entire house had to be replastered.
The plastering company had meanwhile gone bankrupt. If we had awarded the trades ourselves, the costs would have fallen on us. So these have to be borne by the GU.

Isn't it generally the GU who is liable, since you have a contract with them?
How the matter would look if the GU were insolvent is then questionable. However, with the current construction boom, hardly any "good" GU should become insolvent.
If the case does occur nonetheless, you probably still have the chance to negotiate directly with the craftsman, who also has a reputation to lose.

Isn't it the general contractor (GU) who is generally liable, since you have a contract with them? How the situation looks if the GU were insolvent is then questionable. However, with the current construction boom, hardly any "good" GU should become insolvent. If the case still occurs, you probably at least still have the chance to negotiate directly with the craftsman, who also has a reputation to lose.

Correct, the GU is the contact person for all defects and also the one who pays. They can of course refer to their subcontractor for defect remediation, who then performs the work. If the subcontractor no longer exists, it really becomes the GU's problem.

The architect has the advantage that you can choose certain things yourself. For example, if you want very specific windows with certain patterns and this or that front door, it can already be difficult with a GU. Getting certain trades removed from a GU contract is normally possible but rarely financially worthwhile. And the surcharge from plastic triple-glazed to aluminum windows is so high that you would think you get two sets of windows for that price. Especially when time is running short, it speaks clearly more in favor of a GU. But you should definitely get more than two offers. And the construction service descriptions should be read extremely carefully and ideally also written down and compared using an Excel list. For example: extra underfloor heating Company A 4000 / B included / C 5000 or roof sub-items A plastic included / B plastic 1500€ surcharge / C only wood possible (paint yourself). This way, when writing it down, you notice where which construction service description (Bauleistungsbeschreibung) lacks information or has extras that you absolutely want. Often the more expensive offers are not actually more expensive in the end, simply because they include more that you would have taken anyway. But to get an overview of what costs what, you really have to get several offers.

Hi,

this is how you notice when writing down where which construction service description (Bauleistungsbeschreibung) is missing information or has extras that you definitely want. often the more expensive offers are in the end not more expensive at all, simply because more is included that you would have taken anyway. but to get an overview of what costs how much, you really have to obtain several offers.

Full agreement. I also compared all the construction service descriptions against each other in Excel tables and monetarily evaluated the differences to the best of my knowledge and conscience, and related everything to a fixed square meter price. In the end, 3 general contractors were within about 5% difference.

Best regards,

Andreas

I think GU is luxury. We have 6 months construction time stated in the contract. Samples were selected in advance. Apart from the workshop plan meeting, electrical and sanitary installation discussions, there is not much to do. We have a WhatsApp group with the site manager. So far, I find it simply pleasant, and above all financially well manageable.

Hi,

Full agreement. I also compared the entire scope of services description against each other in Excel tables and monetarily evaluated the differences to the best of my knowledge and conscience, all referenced to a fixed price per square meter.
In the end, 3 general contractors were within just under 5% difference.

Best regards,

Andreas

The realization that basically all of them will cost about the same has to be worked out by oneself first. The expensive ones are usually not actually more expensive; they have just included more already. When comparing the scope of services description, I went as far as cross-checking the number of sockets for the house. ^^
When writing down the various things, you notice where certain scope of services descriptions had missing information (which roof tiles are included? / value of the clinker per unit / beech/pine staircase, etc.).
Only if you really read a handful of such scope of services descriptions and also get a few real offers (preferably with different extras each listed separately with prices), can you really decide which company and which extras you actually want. And you see where the supposedly cheaper companies will later collect their money. Missing insurances that you then have to/should arrange yourself, the famous porta-potty missing at one company, a pine staircase instead of often beech (pine staircases are really mega out...) etc.

And when you have gone through all this information, you contact the two companies that appeal to you the most. And there you clarify what was explained in other scope of services descriptions but not in theirs. And then eventually you come to a decision.