Wooden beam BSH / Orientation of slats

Thank you for this insight, I will keep it in mind and discuss it with the commissioned civil engineer. But I would now strongly bet that I would not find this orientation in his plans, and not because I wouldn’t recognize it.

Well, hopefully the planner did not just “go along” with service phase 5 because of its fee share. Whether the construction workers (nomen est omen, they are not called that by pure coincidence) would have even read such a note in the plans is also questionable.

How is one supposed to orient oneself there, where is one supposed to look, if one is looking for an expert who is simply supposed to build a plain ordinary house?

Experts should rather be avoided, better go to professionals like me or one of my not-so-few colleagues. Afterwards you will also know whom you better should not go to:

Unfortunately too late now, but the architect of the design planning did not want to take over the construction execution ... then everything might have gone better.

I have written here several times that one can often “recognize” a “ warns” architect by the fact that he prefers to offer the mandate scope “service phases 1 to 4” aka first half. Letting such a person do the second half as well is not “unfortunately” but “thank God” too late, because then they disgrace themselves in every way except with honor. So be glad that at least this cup has passed you by. However, it was probably a “less-than-smart” idea to switch just from one plum to another. Do you even have a “plain ordinary house”? – I don’t recall you having shown it here already.

off topic What is actually to be thought of the expert associations or clubs? Back then we chose our civil engineer because he belonged to two “professional associations” in addition to the engineering chamber and stated that he was active as an expert and appraiser? For us a seal of quality.

That is by no means off topic. The answer is: distance. Elephants understand much less about bananas than monkeys, yet even I could found a banana association. Association memberships are more like carnival badges as a “seal of quality.” Narrow-minded know-it-alls aka experts like to band together in associations in order to jointly maintain a lawyer against complaints about their competence and to oppose efforts through lobbying to set higher standards for the quality of their services. The engineer must belong to the chamber; that is as indispensable for his professional license as a corresponding liability insurance. Chambers have jurisdictions. Their members would have to move their residence if they find the work of their chamber district lacking in commitment. That is a reason for the existence of the good ones among the associations with voluntary membership.

Where should one look if one is looking for an expert who is simply supposed to build a completely ordinary house?

Do you seriously call that

Our house is completely reinforced concrete (which I wouldn't do again), ready-mixed concrete, no precast walls, built with a white tank.

a "completely ordinary house"?

By that I meant a single-family house with a basement and a gable roof. Not a multi-family house with an underground garage and a pool on sand.

Our house may have had its structural challenges. However, the existing defects arose exclusively during standard tasks such as sealing, plaster, base, window installation, roof, TB, light shafts, vapor barrier, etc.
Lack of expertise and lack of detailed planning on the part of our structural engineer also led to numerous defects

Experts should also be avoided, better go to specialists like me or one of my not so few colleagues. Then you'll also know who you better shouldn't go to:

I have no idea about the difference between experts and specialists. But that’s not essential either. My question was how and where to search? The average person usually only builds a house once and sees experts/specialists everywhere. Through well-done external presentation, website, project presentation, it is hard to distinguish good from less good. Of course, you can visit a completed house project and ask the people, we should have done that too. Yes, and of course ... we made some wrong decisions and were clearly punished for them.

Basically, errors and problems cannot always be avoided when building a house. Even attempts to increase the chances of a smooth house construction, for example by going to a renowned general contractor from the local area, do not always work, as we learned from our circle of acquaintances. Subs were used, unsuitable materials applied ... complete demolition.

11ant, please list (if this is allowed here) the good associations. As a guide for others who are also looking.

By that I meant a single-family house with a basement and a gable roof.

But even there you can – keyword e.g. simple building structure – proactively lay the groundwork to minimize sources of complications. For example ...

Our house possibly had its structural challenges.

... every corner takes a quarter of an hour for the supervising expert. Also, cantilevers, angles, ridges, and the like provide "points" in the inspector’s prayer book.

Also, lack of expertise and missing detailed planning on the part of our civil engineer led to numerous defects

And initially the absence of review of the civil engineer by the building owner. Detailed planning takes place sufficiently before the start of construction (or construction phase) to allow it to be checked systematically in advance. No one has to throw lawyers and experts after the child who has fallen into the well. Buying in the expertise to assess the quality of planning is much cheaper. Often it is even available free of charge, in specialist forums like this one, where, as I said, I don’t recall your construction project being presented in advance. For example, has done this – not for the envy of the legally insured / employees or to show off the giant dildo cistern.

I don’t understand the difference between experts and professionals at all. But that’s not essential either.

It hardly gets more essential. For professionals, expertise plays the leading role. They are proficient and also look around beyond their own plate, so they also have extended basic knowledge of neighboring fields. They transparently explain the why and separate between their private opinion and objective aspects. Experts have decided against a career as the technical elite of their craft because that would require effort to acquire, expand, and keep expert knowledge up to date. They are often chairholders of politically-lobbyistic endowed professorships, have a strong mission-driven mindset (for their "only" truth), and always have time when a news magazine editorial team wants to record a short interview or a seat in the panel of a prime-time talk show awaits them. That is why, despite otherwise rather weakly developed vanity, it is important to me as a professional to firmly and vehemently reject the label "expert." Only with the wrong glasses does that look similar, but in essence, it is the opposite.

My question was, how and where should one search? The average person usually builds a house only once, sees experts/professionals everywhere.

As a professional, I work tirelessly to wash out this outdated multi-generational belief of only building once from the average person's head. After filtering out the experts, the field of remaining professionals is much clearer. Finding the way to me is no real magic, and I point out recommended colleagues at every opportunity; likewise, I point out pretty reliable charlatan indicators ...

Through well-made external presentation, website, project presentation, it is difficult to distinguish good from less good. Of course, one can visit a completed house project and ask the people, we should have done that too.

... with well-made external presentations, you have already recognized an excellent warning sign: a recommendable general contractor (GC) tends to have a rather hidden homepage rather than a top-ranking website, simply because the recommendations of satisfied customers steadily fill his order books. I am the same; I have so many construction consulting mandates that I hardly have time to offer coaching in search engine pessimization. With "completed house projects," you mention another striking keyword: good GCs have a few dozen real photo-documented, verifiable references – bad GCs shine with an overkill of impressive Simshaus renderings.

Basically, mistakes and problems cannot always be avoided in house construction. Even attempts to increase the chances of a smooth house construction, e.g. by going to a renowned local GC, do not always work, as we learned from our circle of acquaintances. Subs were used there,

Frighteningly and shamefully many errors in house construction are definitely avoidable, starting with the 11ant Steinemantra and continuing with the benevolent consideration of proven construction proposals. A reputation is only as valuable as from whom it comes: flee as far as possible from those who praise fools to the skies. And with the darling of the nouveau riche, it will certainly be expensive. A certain amount of subs is inherent in the GC concept. A good GC has a team size roughly corresponding to the number of housing units he completes annually and thus covers the entire weatherproof shell. Doing the interior finishing with their own people is rarely economical for a GC who is not also a general builder (BT). The good ones distinguish themselves by having long-term loyal partnerships (which you can see from the panel vans on the construction sites). I cook only with water, which is sufficient, and most importantly: my advisees can do it too!

For no one – really no one – is it inevitable to sink their construction budget into butcher houses bungled by crooks. Double swear, dude.