The bank may want a construction service description despite individual subcontract awarding

Then you must have a construction service description, right, or how did you obtain the offers?

I have said what and how I want it (Gebäudehülle, Fenster, Dach, Elektro, Gebäudetechnik, Energieeinsparverordnung, grobe Vorstellung für den Ausbau mit Preisgrenze, Sanitär, etc.) and then all trades submitted their offers.

The result is basically the written offers that I have.

So, if I understand you correctly, the bank receives the existing complete offers and should then be satisfied with them?!

As a last resort, that also works. I meant: if you copy together all the tender documents (not the offers, as those are already the responses) and put a table of contents in front, you already have all the chapters of a construction service description, only in different fonts or so, but what the heck.

I said what and how I want it (building envelope, windows, roof, electrical, building technology, energy savings ordinance, rough idea for the interior with price limit, plumbing, etc.) and then all trades submitted their offers.

You really can’t seriously conduct a tender like that. The core of a tender is a hard (i.e. clearly defined) and uniform standard for all bidders. Only that way can you compare.
An award based on the method "just ask one bidder per trade, and if together they don’t exceed the budget, then it’s good enough" is far, far from a tender.

Incidentally, they just share the budget as a cartel ;-)

If you simply send craftsmen a set of drawings saying "look, this is going to be my house, what do you think should be done," then the electrician with two sockets per room is cheaper than the one with four. That works too, but it already hurts in the imagination :-(

I said what and how I want it (building envelope, windows, roof, electrical, building technology, energy saving ordinance, rough idea for the expansion with price limit, sanitary, etc.) and then all trades submitted their offers.

The result is simply the written offers I have.

Would you like to reveal which service phase you are in? I fully agree with toxicmolotov, also with us, conversations with the bank and tendering do not even remotely fall within the same period. The bank also wanted a construction performance description from us, our architect already knew that routine, quickly wrote a bullet list on 2 DIN A4 pages, boldly and largely titled Construction Performance Description, and that was it. Compared to that, the worst construction performance description I have seen from GCs/BTs so far was a detailed spec. The bank didn’t care and accepted it. Seems to be just a formality.

From my point of view, a construction performance description is complete nonsense, because much only emerges and changes during the design planning and especially the execution planning. The process is simply much more dynamic than with a GC using a construction performance description. Therefore, I am also surprised to read that all tenders would already be available.

If I compare that with our situation, that would also make little sense, because no sanitary contractor would seriously submit an offer (and date) if even the rough carpenter is not yet fixed and scheduled. In addition, in my view, it would also not be clever to immediately award everything, as delays can always occur during construction (with a planner)—currently due to the weather.

So it seems to run somewhat differently for you than at least with us—which does not mean anything. But I don’t know it any other way that the planning phase takes at least 4 months or more, yet I would want to have the bank’s approval beforehand, because what use is it to have paid an expensive architect for LPH1 to 5 but then the bank says no...

Uh yes. We have all the offers. The only things that are estimated are the stairs, window sills, and the paving of the outdoor area + lawn and fence.

So what are you asking then? Just copy it and the matter is settled. It just unnecessarily bloats the credit file, but if that makes the banker happy...

In contrast, the worst construction service description I have seen from general contractors/technical planners so far was a detailed spec. The bank didn’t care and accepted it. It seems to be just a formality.

No, the bank is concerned with something entirely different. They want to know whether the house falls into the category "cheap," "medium," or "expensive." The rest is then handled via lump sums.

It makes a difference in the final achievable value of the property whether the house has 1 bathroom or 2 bathrooms and a guest WC, or with electric shutters, triple glazing, and RC2 security or without shutters and double glazing without burglary protection. Whether radiators and gas boiler or underfloor heating and brine-water heat pump... they just want to roughly know how much money the journey will cost. In the end, such a single-family house can also be 80,000 EUR more expensive or cheaper, depending on where you start from. And the bank simply has to assess that somehow. This can only be done through a kind of construction service description or something comparable. They don’t care whether there are 100 or 120 sockets.