Hello 🙂
*Offtopic*
Our house will be move-in ready by June 1st. Since we went for a turnkey build and I usually work during regular construction hours when the contractors are on site, I didn’t always have the chance to check everything myself.
As we are eagerly anticipating moving in and the garage was delivered today, I took the afternoon off to watch the process in person (narrow street, 9 meters (30 feet) garage – impressive how a truck maneuvers in such tight space 🙂 ).
*End of Offtopic*
I used the surveying time to walk through all the rooms and noticed that the double RJ45 sockets (2 outlets) were unfortunately not fully installed. Only single sockets were delivered here. The electrical selection only specified one socket, but I interpreted this to mean that the double outlets didn’t need to be documented separately. (I don’t build a house every day!)
The site manager confirmed the issue and admitted he forgot to inform the electrician that double sockets were ordered. Since the network cables can no longer be pulled in, this defect remains unresolved.
For 5 double network sockets with connection points including the distribution panel (which costs less than 20€), we were charged 800€.
What do you think is a reasonable compensation given that this defect can no longer be corrected? The double sockets serve a specific purpose.
Why am I even asking: We had the washbasin including the mixer tap (Grohe Eurosmart Cosmopolitan) removed from the contract and were told we would receive a credit of 88€. In my opinion, this does not reflect the material and labor costs.
I know I can’t expect to get rich 🙂
Thank you very much and have a great weekend 🙂
*Offtopic*
Our house will be move-in ready by June 1st. Since we went for a turnkey build and I usually work during regular construction hours when the contractors are on site, I didn’t always have the chance to check everything myself.
As we are eagerly anticipating moving in and the garage was delivered today, I took the afternoon off to watch the process in person (narrow street, 9 meters (30 feet) garage – impressive how a truck maneuvers in such tight space 🙂 ).
*End of Offtopic*
I used the surveying time to walk through all the rooms and noticed that the double RJ45 sockets (2 outlets) were unfortunately not fully installed. Only single sockets were delivered here. The electrical selection only specified one socket, but I interpreted this to mean that the double outlets didn’t need to be documented separately. (I don’t build a house every day!)
The site manager confirmed the issue and admitted he forgot to inform the electrician that double sockets were ordered. Since the network cables can no longer be pulled in, this defect remains unresolved.
For 5 double network sockets with connection points including the distribution panel (which costs less than 20€), we were charged 800€.
What do you think is a reasonable compensation given that this defect can no longer be corrected? The double sockets serve a specific purpose.
Why am I even asking: We had the washbasin including the mixer tap (Grohe Eurosmart Cosmopolitan) removed from the contract and were told we would receive a credit of 88€. In my opinion, this does not reflect the material and labor costs.
I know I can’t expect to get rich 🙂
Thank you very much and have a great weekend 🙂
wrack schrieb:
Only single outlets were delivered here. The electrical specification also lists just one outlet, but I interpreted this to mean that double outlets didn’t have to be documented separately. (I don’t build a house every day, unfortunately!)
The site manager confirmed the defect to me; he admitted he forgot to inform the electrician that double outlets were ordered. Since the network cables can no longer be pulled through, the defect remains. I’m not very familiar with this myself.
From what I understand, it was verbally agreed (and likely discussed with the site manager) that double outlets should be installed. However, in writing only single outlets were specified. That’s how I interpret this post, at least.
The electrician probably followed the written order.
The site manager verbally confirmed the defect to you.
If the construction company insists on the written agreement, in my opinion you have slim chances regarding “defect correction.” Whether the site manager’s memory (as an employee of the company) still holds up in such a case is unclear to me.
What I mean to say: From my perspective, this comes down to goodwill. The site manager is aware a mistake was made. But according to the contract, the work was done “correctly.” So the site manager will likely try to resolve this on a goodwill basis (unless the effort involved is very large). If you push too hard (demanding major work such as breaking open walls, re-routing cables, etc.), the goodwill approach might fall through.
That said, I might have misunderstood the original post, or maybe the contract only refers to “outlets” in general and the specific type of outlet is defined elsewhere.
B
Bauexperte27 May 2016 10:45Mycraft schrieb:
...From a legal perspective, the situation is clear. If you have worked carefully and installed the cables according to regulations inside conduits, a replacement should be possible. If not, then they clearly did a poor job.
So either fix it with all the costs and consequences, or get the full amount refunded, meaning the nearly thousand euros as a credit. I am a complete beginner, as many here know, so I will stay out of the discussion about whether empty conduit / DIN requirements apply or not.
Being right and actually winning in court are two different things! A judge would always consider proportionality; so please be cautious with statements like “right, contractor must & co.” Throwing _good_ money after _bad_ should not be the point here!
I see two practical solutions:
Either the cable was installed inside the empty conduit, then rework — which is only a defect after handover! — is inconvenient and frustrating for the contractor but doable. Or the original poster and the contractor agree on a credit. As one can see from the example of the washbasin, the contractor will likely be cautious about their excess costs.
They can hardly credit installation costs, since they happened with the conduit anyway; sharing this “fun” half and half is therefore out of the question, especially since sales costs are included. I would expect a credit in the range of approximately €300.00 (+/-).
Bauexperte
Hello,
Bauexperte, you have a lot of experience in the construction industry. So when I read your assessment here,
I assume there is experience behind that. But at the same time, I am really baffled and shocked by these obvious practices “on the construction site.”
What you are describing basically means: You order a car with electric windows. The manufacturer is too lazy/stupid/incompetent to install them and just installs manual ones instead. And you’re supposed to accept the manual windows and even pay for them? And in court, the manufacturer/contractor gets away with that???? Seriously?
If this really is common practice (based on your experience I assume it is), it really confirms every negative stereotype about the construction industry.
Maybe my perspective from industrial project experience is different, but for us, the contract is fulfilled. No ifs or buts! And if we forget or mess up something on a project, it is corrected. And yes, we have even torn down and rebuilt half a system for such reasons.
Best regards,
Andreas
Bauexperte, you have a lot of experience in the construction industry. So when I read your assessment here,
Bauexperte schrieb:
I am an absolute beginner, as many here know, so I stay out of the discussion about empty conduit/DIN requirement yes/no.
Being right and getting your rights upheld are two different things! A judge would always consider proportionality; so please take it easy with statements like "right, contractor must do this & co." Throwing _good_ money after _bad_ should not be the point of this!
I see two practical solutions here:
Either the cable was installed in the empty conduit, then rework – a defect only after handover! – is annoying and frustrating for the contractor but doable. Or the homeowner and contractor agree on a credit. As can be seen with the example of the washbasin, the contractor is likely to be frugal with his surplus.
He can hardly credit installation since that was already done with the empty conduit; splitting the "cost" fifty-fifty is therefore out; also because sales costs are included. I would guess a credit in the range of about €300.00 +/- will emerge.
I assume there is experience behind that. But at the same time, I am really baffled and shocked by these obvious practices “on the construction site.”
What you are describing basically means: You order a car with electric windows. The manufacturer is too lazy/stupid/incompetent to install them and just installs manual ones instead. And you’re supposed to accept the manual windows and even pay for them? And in court, the manufacturer/contractor gets away with that???? Seriously?
If this really is common practice (based on your experience I assume it is), it really confirms every negative stereotype about the construction industry.
Maybe my perspective from industrial project experience is different, but for us, the contract is fulfilled. No ifs or buts! And if we forget or mess up something on a project, it is corrected. And yes, we have even torn down and rebuilt half a system for such reasons.
Best regards,
Andreas
wrack schrieb:
The electrical specification only lists one outlet box, but I interpreted this as meaning that double outlets do not need to be listed separately. andimann schrieb:
..., but with us, it is standard practice that the contract is fulfilled. No ifs or buts! And if we have forgotten or messed up something on a project, it will be corrected. @andimann
As I wrote above, I find it difficult to judge. But as the original poster wrote, the contract only specifies one outlet box, not a double outlet box. He assumed that this referred to the double outlet box he wanted and discussed.
However, if the contract states ONE outlet box, then the contract is fulfilled. (Among business partners, verbal agreements also count as contracts—but between private individuals and businesses, only written agreements apply, if I’m not mistaken.) This is not to say the home builder is unwilling to cooperate or make adjustments—after all, this business partly relies on referrals. But if they come in with a heavy-handed approach (YOU MUST tear everything up and reinstall), it can happen that the company weighs the effort versus the benefit and simply walks away.
Yes, it still needs to be clarified exactly what is stated in any contracts.
Opening up the wall only becomes an issue if the builder did not install the cables in conduit pipes. Installing cables in conduit pipes is recognized as the standard practice according to DIN. If this was not done and there is no written approval from the client, then the builder has a problem. This applies regardless of the number of connections. LAN cables belong in conduit pipes and should not be embedded permanently in plaster!
Best regards,
Andreas
Opening up the wall only becomes an issue if the builder did not install the cables in conduit pipes. Installing cables in conduit pipes is recognized as the standard practice according to DIN. If this was not done and there is no written approval from the client, then the builder has a problem. This applies regardless of the number of connections. LAN cables belong in conduit pipes and should not be embedded permanently in plaster!
Best regards,
Andreas
Similar topics