ᐅ Construction supervision through a homeowners’ protection association, private builders’ organization, technical inspection agency (such as TÜV or DEKRA), independent expert, or another option...?
Created on: 2 Dec 2015 16:04
B
Bauexperte
A friendly hello to everyone,
who doesn’t know it... or has at least read or heard somewhere: external construction supervision is supposed to help avoid trouble/problems during the adventure of building a house!
Since this topic often comes up in discussions, I would like to ask you to share your personal experiences with experts or associations on the way to your own home in this thread:
Homeowners who consciously decided against external supervision:
As this thread fills up with contributions (which I hope it will), I will pin it at the top of this section. Then every potential homeowner – before starting their project – can get information on the pros and cons of both options.
Thanks for your support!
Best regards, Bauexperte
who doesn’t know it... or has at least read or heard somewhere: external construction supervision is supposed to help avoid trouble/problems during the adventure of building a house!
Since this topic often comes up in discussions, I would like to ask you to share your personal experiences with experts or associations on the way to your own home in this thread:
- Why did you hire external construction supervision?
- Which expert did you work with?
- How many inspections (at which stage of the construction process) did you arrange?
- What did it cost?
- What are your experiences?
- Would you make the same decision again?
Homeowners who consciously decided against external supervision:
- Why did you choose not to use an expert?
- What are your experiences?
- Would you decide the same way again?
As this thread fills up with contributions (which I hope it will), I will pin it at the top of this section. Then every potential homeowner – before starting their project – can get information on the pros and cons of both options.
Thanks for your support!
Best regards, Bauexperte
When it comes to limiting the liability of the person responsible for supervision to their fee, it probably means they are only liable for what they could have reasonably noticed.
What they could have reasonably noticed is limited to the fixed inspection dates agreed in advance with the supervisor. TÜV and DEKRA typically use a multi-point (five?) plan, meaning five appointments where someone visits the site to inspect and approve specific phases and components (for example, after the installation of perimeter insulation in the basement).
Defects that occur between two inspections and are then, for example, covered up with plaster or otherwise concealed cannot, of course, be detected by the inspector and therefore they are not liable for these.
A fixed fee is agreed or set for these five appointments, plus travel costs (charged per kilometer).
A representative from the Homeowners’ Protection Association told me that they attend nine appointments. Billing is based on actual hours spent at 85€/hour (a standardized rate at the Homeowners’ Protection Association). However, you need to be a member there for approximately 100€/year. This person can also carry out KfW55 inspections (additional or combined appointments).
If desired, this person can also visit the construction site daily to check, at 85€/hour.
For architects, there is Service Phase 8, Construction Supervision. A fixed fee is charged for this (according to HOAI or lower if negotiated). Due to the lump-sum contract, the architect is correspondingly liable for all phases. Searching for "architect service phase 8" also brings up many details about liability, especially regarding what is reasonable to expect (finding defects but not being present on site 24/7).
Liability is, however, somewhat relative, I suppose. One party may shift responsibility to another, but I am not very knowledgeable legally.
In the end, in my opinion, the following approach makes sense:
- Ask the Homeowners’ Protection Association and possibly other organizations how their process works, what it costs, and what they supervise
- Ask TÜV, DEKRA, and possibly others what their fees are, what they supervise, and whether their coverage can be extended (five appointments feel too few, just a gut feeling)
- Find an independent surveyor and ask for recommendations and prices, or ask what the same service costs as provided by one of the above, or what a flat-rate supervision like an architect’s would cost
- Ask an architect what they charge for that service stage
Gather questions and offers, weigh options, decide, and if desired, post here with your reasoning to help in the decision-making process.
Personally, I think if you build with an architect, you can go through all phases with them. If not (as is probably the case for us, building directly with the construction company with their own planning office for a fixed price, cheaper than all general contractors so far), then I tend to opt for the person from the Homeowners’ Protection Association.
What they could have reasonably noticed is limited to the fixed inspection dates agreed in advance with the supervisor. TÜV and DEKRA typically use a multi-point (five?) plan, meaning five appointments where someone visits the site to inspect and approve specific phases and components (for example, after the installation of perimeter insulation in the basement).
Defects that occur between two inspections and are then, for example, covered up with plaster or otherwise concealed cannot, of course, be detected by the inspector and therefore they are not liable for these.
A fixed fee is agreed or set for these five appointments, plus travel costs (charged per kilometer).
A representative from the Homeowners’ Protection Association told me that they attend nine appointments. Billing is based on actual hours spent at 85€/hour (a standardized rate at the Homeowners’ Protection Association). However, you need to be a member there for approximately 100€/year. This person can also carry out KfW55 inspections (additional or combined appointments).
If desired, this person can also visit the construction site daily to check, at 85€/hour.
For architects, there is Service Phase 8, Construction Supervision. A fixed fee is charged for this (according to HOAI or lower if negotiated). Due to the lump-sum contract, the architect is correspondingly liable for all phases. Searching for "architect service phase 8" also brings up many details about liability, especially regarding what is reasonable to expect (finding defects but not being present on site 24/7).
Liability is, however, somewhat relative, I suppose. One party may shift responsibility to another, but I am not very knowledgeable legally.
In the end, in my opinion, the following approach makes sense:
- Ask the Homeowners’ Protection Association and possibly other organizations how their process works, what it costs, and what they supervise
- Ask TÜV, DEKRA, and possibly others what their fees are, what they supervise, and whether their coverage can be extended (five appointments feel too few, just a gut feeling)
- Find an independent surveyor and ask for recommendations and prices, or ask what the same service costs as provided by one of the above, or what a flat-rate supervision like an architect’s would cost
- Ask an architect what they charge for that service stage
Gather questions and offers, weigh options, decide, and if desired, post here with your reasoning to help in the decision-making process.
Personally, I think if you build with an architect, you can go through all phases with them. If not (as is probably the case for us, building directly with the construction company with their own planning office for a fixed price, cheaper than all general contractors so far), then I tend to opt for the person from the Homeowners’ Protection Association.
Phew, we've gone through everything but still no progress....
We planned with an architect who will also manage the construction with his company and subcontract additional trades.
I have the same question – getting an external inspector would probably make sense since making corrections would cost the architect money and wouldn’t be in his best interest. On the other hand, as the construction supervisor, he is liable if something goes wrong, isn’t he?
So what would be the best approach?
We planned with an architect who will also manage the construction with his company and subcontract additional trades.
I have the same question – getting an external inspector would probably make sense since making corrections would cost the architect money and wouldn’t be in his best interest. On the other hand, as the construction supervisor, he is liable if something goes wrong, isn’t he?
So what would be the best approach?
Since the architect is part of the construction company, hire an external supervisor.
If the architect is not part of the construction company, some opinions suggest still involving an external party, while others (including mine) consider the architect, who is supposedly independent, to act as the supervisor.
If the architect is not part of the construction company, some opinions suggest still involving an external party, while others (including mine) consider the architect, who is supposedly independent, to act as the supervisor.
Kaspatoo schrieb:
Since the architect works for the construction company, you should hire an independent supervisor.
If the architect does not work for the construction company, there are opinions that still recommend bringing in an external supervisor, while others (including myself) would consider the supposedly independent architect as the supervisor. And ideally, the architect I hire should also be an energy consultant and be eligible for subsidies as a construction supervisor through the KFW?
Yes, it is possible, but usually this is handled already by the general contractor (GC) or the construction company, as they typically subcontract someone external to carry out these tasks (this was explained to me by several GCs and builders).
I am currently wondering if it is possible to hire two people for the supervision and bill this through the KfW bank. In other words, the GC or construction company also prepares the KfW55 certification, performs the necessary inspections, and I would claim 50% of these related costs from KfW. To be safe, I would hire an external expert (for example, from the Homeowners’ Protection Association) to additionally carry out the KfW inspections. Can I also claim these costs through KfW, assuming the funding cap for eligible costs is not exceeded?
The question is not whether this makes sense, but solely whether it is possible to claim double services through KfW.
Alternatively, I would have to remove the KfW-related calculations from the construction company or require that they subcontract the expert of my choice.
I am currently wondering if it is possible to hire two people for the supervision and bill this through the KfW bank. In other words, the GC or construction company also prepares the KfW55 certification, performs the necessary inspections, and I would claim 50% of these related costs from KfW. To be safe, I would hire an external expert (for example, from the Homeowners’ Protection Association) to additionally carry out the KfW inspections. Can I also claim these costs through KfW, assuming the funding cap for eligible costs is not exceeded?
The question is not whether this makes sense, but solely whether it is possible to claim double services through KfW.
Alternatively, I would have to remove the KfW-related calculations from the construction company or require that they subcontract the expert of my choice.
@Kaspatoo
I’m not an expert on KfW!
But I noticed a misunderstanding in your last post (at least to the best of my knowledge/reading).
1. The person verifying energy efficiency from KfW55 onwards must not have any financial interest in the construction company and must be a certified energy consultant from a specific list.
2. Invoices are not submitted to the KfW bank; instead, they are covered by the approved and pre-paid repayment grant.
I’m not an expert on KfW!
But I noticed a misunderstanding in your last post (at least to the best of my knowledge/reading).
1. The person verifying energy efficiency from KfW55 onwards must not have any financial interest in the construction company and must be a certified energy consultant from a specific list.
2. Invoices are not submitted to the KfW bank; instead, they are covered by the approved and pre-paid repayment grant.
Similar topics