ᐅ Have the house designed by a general contractor or an architect?

Another advantage of the general contractor (GC) is that if there are defects, you may have two companies to address.

In our case, after two years, the entire house needed to be replastered due to defects. The plastering company had since gone bankrupt. If we had managed the trades ourselves, the costs would have fallen on us. With a GC, these costs are their responsibility.

Musketier schrieb:
Another advantage of the general contractor (GC): if there are defects, you potentially have two companies to approach.
In our case, after two years, the entire house had to be replastered due to defects.
The plastering company had since gone bankrupt. If we had managed the trades ourselves, we would have been stuck with the costs. As it was, these are covered by the GC.

Isn’t it generally the GC who is liable, since you have a contract with them?
What happens if the GC becomes insolvent is uncertain. However, with the current construction boom, it’s unlikely that a reputable GC would go bankrupt.
If it does happen, you might still have the chance to negotiate directly with the subcontractor, who also has a reputation to maintain.

Peanuts74 schrieb:
Isn’t it the general contractor (GC) who is generally responsible since you have a contract with them?
What happens if the GC becomes insolvent is questionable. However, with the current construction boom, hardly any “reliable” GC should become insolvent.
If that does happen, at least you might still have a chance to negotiate directly with the tradesperson, who also has a reputation to uphold.

Correct, the GC is the main contact for all defects and also the one who pays. They can then refer the defect correction to their subcontractors, who carry out the work. If the subcontractor no longer exists, it really becomes the GC’s problem.

The architect has the advantage that you can select certain items yourself. For example, if you want very specific windows with particular patterns and a certain front door, this can be difficult with a GC. It is usually possible to exclude certain trades from the GC contract, but financially it rarely pays off. The price difference between triple-glazed plastic windows and aluminum windows is so high that you might think you are getting two sets of windows for free.
Especially when time is limited, there are many reasons to go with a GC. However, you should definitely get more than two quotes. The scope of work (specifications) should be read extremely carefully and, ideally, compared using an Excel spreadsheet. For example: extra underfloor heating—Company A: 4000, Company B: included, Company C: 5000; or roofing—Company A: plastic included, Company B: plastic with a 1500€ (approximately $1,600) surcharge, Company C: wood only (needs painting yourself).
This way, when writing it down, you notice which scope of work lacks information or includes extras you definitely want. Often, the more expensive quotes are not actually more expensive in the end, simply because they include more than you would have chosen otherwise. But to get an overview of what costs what, you really need to collect several quotes.

Hi,

Payday schrieb:
This way, when listing things out, you can see where each scope of work description (Bauleistungsbeschreibung) is missing information or includes extras that you really want. Often, the more expensive quotes aren’t actually more expensive in the end, simply because they include more items that you would have chosen anyway. But to get an overview of what costs what, you do need to get several quotes.

I completely agree. I also compared all the scope of work descriptions against each other in Excel spreadsheets and monetarily evaluated the differences to the best of my knowledge and judgment, all related back to a fixed price per square meter (QM).
In the end, the three general contractors were within about a 5% difference.

Best regards,

Andreas

I consider GU to be a luxury. Our contract states a construction period of 6 months. The material selections were made in advance. Apart from the shop drawing review and the electrical and plumbing installation meetings, there is not much left to do.

andimann schrieb:
Hi,

I completely agree. I compared the full scope of work descriptions side by side in Excel spreadsheets, evaluated the differences to the best of my knowledge and judgment in monetary terms, and related everything to a fixed price per square meter. In the end, three general contractors were within about a 5% difference.

Best regards,

Andreas

The realization that, basically, all options will cost roughly the same takes some personal effort to reach. The expensive ones usually aren’t actually more expensive; they’ve just included more items upfront. When comparing the scope of work descriptions, I even double-checked the number of electrical outlets for the entire house. ^^

While noting the various details, you notice where some scope of work descriptions are missing information (e.g., which roof tiles are included? / unit price of the facing bricks / beech or pine stairs, etc.).

Only by reading about half a dozen of these scope of work descriptions and getting several real quotes (ideally with different extras listed separately with prices) can you really decide which company and which extras you want. You also see where supposedly cheaper companies will try to recover their money later on, such as missing insurance you’ll have to arrange yourself, the infamous portable toilet (dixi) included by some contractors but not others, a pine staircase instead of the more common beech one (pine stairs are really out of style), and so forth.

Once you have all this information, you contact the two companies that appeal to you the most. There, you clarify the details that were explained in other scope of work descriptions but are missing in these. Eventually, this process leads to your final decision.