Way, actual division/owners' meeting, communal costs

Hello,

we are new here in the forum, but have already read quite a bit on the subject of buying/building a house. Initially, we wanted to buy a "used house," but since the market in Berlin currently does not offer much within our budget range, we have increasingly shifted our search towards building. We would also be satisfied with a terraced or semi-detached house, provided the location and price are right. Now we have received a brochure from Deutsche Reihenhaus AG. Nice location, good price, and as far as the equipment is concerned at least very solid, though not luxury. However, there is a [WEG-Teilung]. Now we know the downsides and are not really enthusiastic about the prospect that dear neighbors could impose costs on us that we would not want to spend ourselves.

But now to my question, which we cannot quite legally classify 100% at the moment. The brochure contains the following paragraph:

The legislator has stipulated that in a [WEG-Teilung], the building envelope (roof and facade) must mandatorily belong to the community. Deutsche Reihenhaus has incorporated a special clause into the declaration of division concerning this:
"Each owner of a condominium has the exclusive special right of use to the entire communal property of the residential unit in which their
[I]separate property is located. The same applies to the garages.
Economically, this means that each owner is responsible for the maintenance and preservation of their residential unit, including roof surfaces, facades, windows, front door,
load-bearing building parts, their garage, and the respectively assigned plot of land themselves and must bear the costs incurred alone."


This clause regulates the communal ownership of the building envelope. That means: you take care of the maintenance and bear the costs for facade and roof. Thus, you are responsible for your house and your facade yourself. The communal costs and decisions are limited to paths and garbage areas.

Am I reading this correctly that this basically represents a kind of light real division? If so, we could quite well live with the fact that the owners’ meeting co-decides on paths and garbage areas as long as the rest stays in our custody. Or am I overlooking any pitfalls here?

Best regards from Berlin!

I know the principle from the "dream houses". There is even a communal central heating system for the entire complex. But then you already have the first problems. You have to pay service charges for communal tasks and the [WEG-Verwaltung]. Who decides on the external appearance of the houses ==> the community. Who covers unpaid service charges if an owner cannot pay ==> the community, etc.

If I buy a house, then it should belong to me without any ifs or buts! Advantage for the seller: save costs.

I know the principle from the "dream houses." There is even a communal central heating system for the entire complex. But with that, you also already have the first problems. You have to pay house fees for communal tasks and the WEG administration. Who decides on the external appearance of the houses ==> the community. Who covers unpaid house fees if an owner cannot pay ==> the community, etc.

If I buy a house, then it should belong to me without any ifs or buts! Advantage for the seller: saving costs.

Yes, we are aware of the communal heating and the administration. However, we understand the bit about the external appearance differently, if we are interpreting the passage correctly. Or are we really on the wrong track here?

Of course, we would prefer our own single-family house. A semi-detached house would be better as well. But for us, it is also a matter of cost...

As a layperson, I understand it to mean that you are not liable or responsible for the Velux window or the roof tiles of others or anything of the sort. WEG applies to common paths and garbage areas. Nothing more. You will each also get your own house connections. I would say: before you dare nothing and own nothing - why not this terraced house?! I see no problems as long as this is also regulated in the notary contract.

As a layman, I understand it to mean that you are not liable or responsible for the Velux window or the roof tiles of the other person or the like. WEG applies to common paths and garbage areas. Nothing more. You will each also get your own house connections.

It is not quite that simple; it depends very precisely on the contracts. We know a "dream house development," and not everything that glitters there is gold. Regarding the property: the houses from Dt. Reihenhaus are perhaps not bad, but "only" property divided according to WEG? It is definitely a WEG community with all kinds of (financial and design-related) disadvantages. Economically, one may take care of one's separate property/use rights alone, but design is, for example, still a communal expense in the dream houses (see my first post).

Hello,

However, there is a condominium division (WEG) there. Now we know the downsides and are not exactly thrilled at the prospect that dear neighbors could impose costs on you that you yourself would not want to spend.

If a division according to WEG is planned for semi-detached housing, this usually happens when the property for the entire development only has a shared access road. However, it "can" also be the case that the development plan (B-Plan) only permits single-family housing, in which case division according to WEG is mandatory. This means that a complete semi-detached house looks from the outside like a "normal" single-family house, but in fact the separation begins behind the shared front door. If and when the notarial contract takes this into account, the "rights of co-owners on the property" remain within narrow legal limits.

Or am I overlooking any pitfalls now?

You can find the §§ of the Condominium Act (Wohnungseigentumsgesetz) online. To what extent “pitfalls” are embedded in the notarial contract can only be answered by a thorough review of it, and not through a brief passage of the offer.

Rhenish greetings