Which house construction company should we choose?

Phew.

First, take a deep breath...

So guys seriously? You ask a question and your way of communicating is so snappy. Then you can’t be surprised if forums are used less and less. You actually get better communication on Facebook.

I’m not telling you nonsense, here in Erfurt it’s just like this: there are new development areas and first the “big” developers are "guaranteed" plots of land, so after all the developers have left a new development area maybe only 5 to 10 plots remain.

These plots are simply not offered on the “free market”! If you are then interested in building a house with the said developer, you get the contact of the “marketer” of the plots and buy the plot beforehand "separately".

If anyone still has reasonable answers, then thanks in advance and have a nice weekend

Well, honestly, except for 1-2 sentences, I didn't find the comments that bad. However, many here rightly become alarmed when a construction company pressures you to sign before you have a property or it's confirmed. There are some companies (or sellers) who want to take advantage of you. You read about that here quite often. It also happened in my family.

It doesn't seem unusual to me that developers are often supplied with land early by the municipalities - due to better contacts or other reasons.

However, with such arrangements (house without a fixed plot), you have to be very careful. IF I were to consider something like that, I would have potential plots shown or guaranteed to me in writing beforehand. Also, check with the municipality who owns them or whether the information from the construction company is accurate. And definitely include a - free of charge - withdrawal clause in case you don’t like the plots shown. Here, people are often ripped off with exorbitant cancellation fees. Another point: the house you buy in advance may possibly not even be able to be built on the later plot; that depends on the development plan. And then the disappointment is big, or the extra costs start. Here you have no room for negotiation anymore since you already signed the contract.

Is the marketer and the developer the same company? If yes, then there is a dependency and the tax office will bill you accordingly. Even if the construction company promised you otherwise. Some construction companies like to tell untruths here.

Even if all this is true, then detach yourself from the fact that YOU now have a house plan, but rather find the developer!!! (Land + house are a unit and are treated as such for tax purposes), then plan the house with them on the available plot, where the floor area ratio, number of floors, house orientation, etc. can then be specifically coordinated.

I would NOT conclude a pure house construction contract WITHOUT land, and you have received these answers here, but you do not want to hear them.

First, take a deep breath... ... if anyone still has reasonable answers now, thanks in advance and have a nice weekend

The answers were reasonable after all. You are simply not in a position in the current market to think about a construction company if you don’t have land. You can do that if you have enough money for the current "plots" with existing buildings, which are going for lunar prices today. If not, you have to work on finding land. If developers are always involved, you have to swallow the bitter pill and pay land transfer tax on everything – house and land. There is no way around it – just ask the representative if he takes liability in case he claims otherwise.

The only thing to discuss is 11ant’s statement "Kniestock one eighty is a typical newbie nonsense." Presumably, it’s about – "why not just a full floor right away, with 1.8 m knee wall you can’t achieve a staggered floor without a larger ground floor area"??

So guys seriously? You ask a question and your way of communicating is so snappy.

No, it isn’t again. I once looked into the old thread from 2013 (or so): here too you called us unfriendly just because everyone criticized your HAR under 4sqm as well as your idea to dry laundry in the living room. I happened to read that you were very upset about the reactions. In this respect, you should consider why you constantly accuse others of being unfriendly... hello, we are giving you our good knowledge!

I’m not telling you nonsense, in Erfurt it’s just the case that there are new development areas and first the "big" developers get "guaranteed" plots and thus in a new development area maybe only 5 to 10 plots remain after all the developers have withdrawn.

Yes, they get a guarantee if no one else takes them. The municipality sells to interested parties. If no private individual contacts the municipality expressing interest, of course they take the "brokerage business" of the general contractors.

These plots simply are not offered on the "open market"! Then one is

A municipality simply does not advertise, that is done by the general contractors and developers. That’s what I mean by:

Private builders have the same rights. They just have to get moving.

You have to approach the municipality and/or follow regional newspapers. Builders think that the plot is offered exclusively to them by the developer or general contractor. But these are "only unsolicited offers".

Regarding the marketing of real estate, I do not share Yvonne’s disbelief - municipalities absolutely do market properties themselves, just not through their property office, but for example through their savings bank. However, consider that only one tax office is responsible for a development area and the clerks A-K and L-Z often sit together in the cafeteria. Perhaps it only becomes apparent to them, after each of them has encountered the same case scenario for the third time, that XY is always the seller of the land for the houses of the developer - but then all those involved receive a questionnaire. Such things come to light when the land purchase contract states that construction must be done with a particular developer. Whether that party is the "third party" or just "the other hand of the seller" makes no difference for the assessment of whether a connection exists. In case of doubt, they simply determine it and issue a notice, which together with its default surcharges is fully enforceable while you sue them. They are also already familiar with the "trick" of doing both connected deals on different days and whether the chicken or the egg came first, as an old joke. For the buyer, however, it makes a difference: a construction contract first makes the land issue blackmailable or as uncertain as on the high seas.

Only the statement from 11ant "knee wall one point eighty is a typical newbie nonsense" can be discussed. Presumably, it is about - "why not just a full storey right away, with a 1.8 m knee wall you cannot have a staggered storey without a larger ground floor footprint"??

No, it is about the empirical fact that developers of land-use plans, if they want to avoid full upper floors, usually also seal loopholes like knee wall heights and dormers airtight. By "typical newbie nonsense" I mean the delusion that every last corner of the room absolutely must have full standing height. An energy-saving ordinance attic is neither a sauna nor a refrigerator, and the highest cupboard compartments regularly store things with which one only clutters oneself. With the hatred of the sloped roof, the builder only stands in his own way. In Krüger’s sense, this is not art, but disposable. Moreover, "after firm comes off" applies also to knee wall heights: too much is not good because it stupidly pushes the boundary line between facade and roof surface windows too high; and even more too much causes the spatial experience to shift from "high knee wall" to "straight-walled storey with clipped corners." Then the rooms effectively have donkey ears.