ᐅ Construction supervision through a homeowners’ protection association, private builders’ organization, technical inspection agency (such as TÜV or DEKRA), independent expert, or another option...?

With this way of thinking, the architect's role is driven to absurdity...

Apart from the fact that a construction supervisor wouldn’t necessarily have to be less universal... or is there a different one for each trade? At least here locally, it is always just one person...

Sebastian, this is now an absolutely unfounded claim from you, without addressing any argument. An expert must be less skilled in many areas (planning, drawing, tendering, etc.) that an architect handles. Here, for example, with my neighbor who had a very well-known (and expensive) architect, there was also a different person as the site manager. But as with you, my "others do it this way too" is a poor argument.

Sent from mobile

Oh, you’re just trying to annoy me again... I know the type, you only come looking for me.

It’s not without reason – you’re free to hire an architect only up to design phase 4 and have the rest done elsewhere. You gave that example yourself...

But you can also hire for all design phases, then hiring an additional expert is wasted money.

It’s possible to make mistakes with both the architect and the expert – no question. And it should be someone who has construction experience, not just a bookworm who isn’t really accepted on site.

The only person with a personal issue here is you, as can be seen by the fact that you’re starting this again. I simply shared my opinion and explained that an architect is less specialized due to a broader range of tasks. Of course, hiring the wrong "person" for something is always possible; you’re always wiser in hindsight.

sent from mobile

The expert I spoke with from the Homeowners’ Protection Association said that he does this work "on a voluntary basis" within the framework of the association. His main profession is working at an architecture/planning firm. And I believe that, apart from those certified by TÜV or DEKRA, most independent experts will be somewhat similar to architects and will have carried out other tasks, especially in planning, throughout their careers.

If it were an architect who normally never performs construction supervision, then yes, practical experience might be lacking.

Saruss, earlier you mentioned site management. However, this thread is about construction supervision. To me, the difference is that site management mainly involves coordinating the trades and their general execution. But to ensure nothing is overlooked, there is construction supervision/site monitoring, which involves checking the work and looking for defects at specific times.

The question of independence, as far as Sebastian and I understand you, is whether you are already working with an independent architect or a planner/architect employed by the building company or general contractor. In the first case, we consider a fourth party to be too many; in the second, we see it as necessary.

That is our view, but you are free to have a different opinion—that is what this thread is for. It should not be about convincing others to change their minds.

The downside of an independent architect is that you usually have to pay them first before you can obtain (fixed-price) quotes for the construction project. With, for example, a general contractor, you can get offers directly, but the overall cost may be higher. However, this topic is already discussed in another thread.

I think our discussion here is now moving away from the main topic of the thread. If further conversation is needed, perhaps we should start a separate channel.

Good evening

Sebastian79 schrieb:
And never with construction supervisors either? Of course, you can double or triple check everything, but in the end, when building with an architect, it’s a pointless waste of money – and a sign of mistrust towards the architect.

You just want to be right no matter what, don’t you?

Sebastian79 schrieb:
With that way of thinking, you take the architect concept to absurdity…

No – is the architect’s profession, in your view, flawless ahead of time?

Sebastian79 schrieb:
Oh, you just want to annoy again… we know the type, you only pick on me.

Why can’t you just leave the threads where you gave your opinion and received little agreement alone?

It’s not @Saruss who’s "annoying" – you are just acting like a sore loser again; nothing more, nothing less. I had actually hoped you had gotten past this phase; unfortunately, you still don’t seem to think much of setting rules or structure.

PS – if you want to use the report button, I want to let you know beforehand that your report will come straight to me.

Kaspatoo schrieb:
The expert I spoke to from the Homeowners Protection Association said he does it "voluntarily" as part of the association, according to his own statement.

And the earth is flat; please don’t believe that statement. “Voluntary” means he doesn’t get paid for his work. But I assume you have made a contribution to the Homeowners Protection Association, right?

Kaspatoo schrieb:
And I believe, aside from TÜV or DEKRA, most independent experts will be somewhat like architects and have also performed other, especially planning-related, tasks in their careers.

You can save your belief for church. Many of the experts listed on free platforms have trained in a skilled trade. The majority are master masons, concrete specialists, or carpenters. Most of them regularly complete continuing education – something you rarely find with a settled architect.

Please ask your expert about his training and how he became an expert; I would really be interested.

Kaspatoo schrieb:
In the first case, we consider a fourth person to be too many, in the latter case necessary.

Apparently, I have a reading comprehension issue – why a fourth person?

Best regards, Bauexperte