11ant
2022-12-24 16:34:46
- #1
The note in the soil report is initially to be read by the property owner in such a way that the expert himself is neither qualified nor authorized to provide a professional assessment regarding the unexploded ordnance aspect or even to issue a negative certificate. Up to this point, this is a security for him (just as I note on this contribution that it is an expression of opinion and not legal advice).
However, if the report falls into the hands of the building authority, the notes can certainly be read as a duty to point out an incompleteness if the negative certificate from the responsible unexploded ordnance expert authority is not attached. This can indeed be the case in such a
collective certificate, but
I would not rely on verbally expressed disinterest.
Many building applicants make two "favorite mistakes": 1. to regard a building authority as the responsible authority and 2. not to differentiate their statements between written and verbal. However, it should be noted: 1. the municipal building authority is often only a mailroom adding a vote, and the decision is made in the district building department; 2. there is a world of difference between the lip service of a tariff employee and the sealed legal act of an official, even though both are outwardly indistinguishable (many authorities nowadays have casual Fridays all week long including Adiletten - I don't comment on that if you understand me).
However, if the report falls into the hands of the building authority, the notes can certainly be read as a duty to point out an incompleteness if the negative certificate from the responsible unexploded ordnance expert authority is not attached. This can indeed be the case in such a
But fortunately the local building authority had a clearance for the entire new development area.
collective certificate, but
Thanks, we called the building authority - they didn't care at all
I would not rely on verbally expressed disinterest.
Many building applicants make two "favorite mistakes": 1. to regard a building authority as the responsible authority and 2. not to differentiate their statements between written and verbal. However, it should be noted: 1. the municipal building authority is often only a mailroom adding a vote, and the decision is made in the district building department; 2. there is a world of difference between the lip service of a tariff employee and the sealed legal act of an official, even though both are outwardly indistinguishable (many authorities nowadays have casual Fridays all week long including Adiletten - I don't comment on that if you understand me).