The construction company did not install a strip foundation

We had a turnkey bungalow built by an East German construction company in 2011. Since we do not have a basement, a strip foundation 100x40 plus 20 cm floor slab was agreed upon in the construction contract. The strip foundation was not installed and no contract amendment was made. The construction company now argues that they used more gravel and more reinforcing steel in the floor slab. However, we paid for the strip foundation. Neither a construction manager nor a truly qualified employee supervised the whole process. The expert listed in his report that the use of more gravel was more expensive than a strip foundation. That really has a "Geschmäckle". What can we do? Regards tsroh

... from an East German construction company ...

Sounds somewhat derogatory, the post would have had the same meaning without this addition. What I seriously wonder is why such a "defect" is noticed more than 3 years later. One really shouldn't rely on a site manager / expert of the construction company either, common sense tells you that. Better to bring in an independent person yourself.

Regarding the topic itself, I would sue for compensation / damages... if it was clearly agreed according to the construction performance description or contract, then the service logically has to be provided accordingly. After all, contracts exist to be fulfilled.

Hello,

That really has a "Geschmäckle". What can we do?

A "Geschmäckle" insofar as you were not informed about the change in the foundation; but this was surely permitted to the provider somewhere in the depths of the contract. The foundation carried out, deviating from the owed service, is not bad. Furthermore, you have from the expert in writing that you rather saved money. So, where do you see the problem?

Rhenish regards

Hello,

Sounds somehow derogatory,

Help .... after 25 years this shouldn’t still be an issue?!? No one would get upset if it said "western" provider. You can also exaggerate ;)

Regarding the topic itself, I would sue for compensation/payment in lieu... if it was clearly agreed according to the construction service description or contract, then the service logically has to be provided that way. Contracts are ultimately meant to be fulfilled.

I am a bit under the weather with the flu, but I think I can still read. The OP clearly writes that the installation of "more" gravel turned out to be "more expensive"... the provider was more expensive. The expert does not say that the foundation was wrong, otherwise the OP would surely have mentioned this. So, why should a lawyer and court be involved here?

The question why an expert was commissioned after 3 years is, however, justified.

Rhenish greetings