Hello everyone,
sorry, this will be a bit longer, but I think it’s necessary to explain the situation.
At the beginning of the year, we hired construction supervision for our new build, but we’re not really satisfied with how it has been going so far.
Even during the review of the building specifications, the supervisor pointed out several issues that either didn’t make economic sense (for example, installing a cistern), were mentioned elsewhere in the specifications, or seemed obvious to us (such as comments about missing guardrails in the stair description).
In general, the supervisor is quite quick to make claims. For example, regarding the Dryfix adhesive that our builder has been using instead of mortar for erecting the shell for a few years now, he was quick to say that this is not approved in Germany and that we should ask the builder for the official approval. It took me less than five minutes to find the relevant DIBt approval on the manufacturer’s website. Later, the supervisor more or less backtracked, saying that this method is rather unusual in Germany and many clients don’t want these chemical products anyway.
During the first inspection of the shell, a report was created which included several claims that I also shared with the builder. The builder wasn’t very happy but did address some points by phone.
Examples:
This kind of thing runs throughout the entire report.
My wife and I are now quite unsure whom to believe here:
On one side, the supervisor (who my wife had a bad gut feeling about from the start), who, in my impression, has little practical experience, focuses heavily on regulations, and often goes way beyond what seems necessary.
On the other side, the builder, who is very committed to our site and even does not charge us for delays (see my recent thread about the neighbor’s legal claim).
For us laypeople in construction matters, it is currently very difficult to tell who is right or whether continuing with the supervision like this still makes sense.
Do you have any advice on how to handle this situation? And thanks for reading :-)
sorry, this will be a bit longer, but I think it’s necessary to explain the situation.
At the beginning of the year, we hired construction supervision for our new build, but we’re not really satisfied with how it has been going so far.
Even during the review of the building specifications, the supervisor pointed out several issues that either didn’t make economic sense (for example, installing a cistern), were mentioned elsewhere in the specifications, or seemed obvious to us (such as comments about missing guardrails in the stair description).
In general, the supervisor is quite quick to make claims. For example, regarding the Dryfix adhesive that our builder has been using instead of mortar for erecting the shell for a few years now, he was quick to say that this is not approved in Germany and that we should ask the builder for the official approval. It took me less than five minutes to find the relevant DIBt approval on the manufacturer’s website. Later, the supervisor more or less backtracked, saying that this method is rather unusual in Germany and many clients don’t want these chemical products anyway.
During the first inspection of the shell, a report was created which included several claims that I also shared with the builder. The builder wasn’t very happy but did address some points by phone.
Examples:
- missing ventilation for the roof drainage: it’s not missing, it’s just still hidden under the insulation of the upper floor. It will be completed.
- open empty conduits in the attic: these will be sealed once the electrical work is finished (satellite cabling still pending)
This kind of thing runs throughout the entire report.
My wife and I are now quite unsure whom to believe here:
On one side, the supervisor (who my wife had a bad gut feeling about from the start), who, in my impression, has little practical experience, focuses heavily on regulations, and often goes way beyond what seems necessary.
On the other side, the builder, who is very committed to our site and even does not charge us for delays (see my recent thread about the neighbor’s legal claim).
For us laypeople in construction matters, it is currently very difficult to tell who is right or whether continuing with the supervision like this still makes sense.
Do you have any advice on how to handle this situation? And thanks for reading :-)
B
Bauexperte9 Dec 2015 23:51Good evening,
I have a strong suspicion about which association this expert belongs to... in any case, the described approach matches my experience with someone like that.
If I were you, I wouldn’t hesitate and would terminate the cooperation immediately. I recently mentioned elsewhere that the first pain is the cheapest 😉
For example, look for support with your construction project through an independent experts' association. Since you’re already at the shell construction stage, there aren’t many more “meaningful” inspections to come; so this probably won’t cause a major dent in your budget, even though an independent expert is more expensive than one affiliated with an association.
Trusting your gut feeling is always good, listening to it even better; pulling the emergency brake in time: priceless. It sounds like your current expert isn’t capable of uncovering any “real” irregularities, should they actually occur. You have probably already noticed that they disrupt rather than help the relationship between the client and the general contractor.
Best regards,
Bauexperte
I have a strong suspicion about which association this expert belongs to... in any case, the described approach matches my experience with someone like that.
If I were you, I wouldn’t hesitate and would terminate the cooperation immediately. I recently mentioned elsewhere that the first pain is the cheapest 😉
For example, look for support with your construction project through an independent experts' association. Since you’re already at the shell construction stage, there aren’t many more “meaningful” inspections to come; so this probably won’t cause a major dent in your budget, even though an independent expert is more expensive than one affiliated with an association.
Trusting your gut feeling is always good, listening to it even better; pulling the emergency brake in time: priceless. It sounds like your current expert isn’t capable of uncovering any “real” irregularities, should they actually occur. You have probably already noticed that they disrupt rather than help the relationship between the client and the general contractor.
Best regards,
Bauexperte
If it doesn’t fit, then, as the building expert has already pointed out, you should respond accordingly and replace it.
Just as a side note on this: the same was not included in our scope of work either, and what is not included will not be provided. The additional cost for us would have been 95€.
Blaine81 schrieb:
or from our perspective, things that were taken for granted (e.g. note regarding the missing guardrail in the description of the staircase).
Just as a side note on this: the same was not included in our scope of work either, and what is not included will not be provided. The additional cost for us would have been 95€.
Good evening everyone, thank you very much for your replies!
The association is the one usually abbreviated with four letters here in the forum ...
What is your assessment here, what should I expect if I terminate? Before starting the project, we signed a contract for a full construction-related quality control – but the contract says nothing about termination or its consequences. Should we expect the expert to claim damages for lost earnings?
Should the termination be with or without stating the reason?
Our builder saw it differently; he considered it part of the staircase system (which was included in the scope of works). I also see this as a matter of the level of detail in the scope of works. After speaking with the builder, these points were clarified for us accordingly.
Bauexperte schrieb:
Good evening,
I have a strong suspicion about which association this expert belongs to ... the described approach definitely matches my experience with one of them.
The association is the one usually abbreviated with four letters here in the forum ...
Bauexperte schrieb:
If I were you, I wouldn’t hesitate and would terminate the cooperation immediately. I recently wrote elsewhere that the first pain is the cheapest one 😉
What is your assessment here, what should I expect if I terminate? Before starting the project, we signed a contract for a full construction-related quality control – but the contract says nothing about termination or its consequences. Should we expect the expert to claim damages for lost earnings?
Should the termination be with or without stating the reason?
Musketier schrieb:
Just as a side note: the same was not included in the scope of work at our place either, and what is not included will not be provided. In our case, the additional cost would have been €95.
Our builder saw it differently; he considered it part of the staircase system (which was included in the scope of works). I also see this as a matter of the level of detail in the scope of works. After speaking with the builder, these points were clarified for us accordingly.
Similar topics