Hello everyone,
We have a newly built house and later noticed with regret that our facade is slightly uneven:
According to the construction company, it is annoying but within the acceptable range and less than 1mm.
After consulting my lawyer, he said that the DIN 18202 standard allows a tolerance of 7mm (0.28 inches) over 2m (6.56 feet), and only between measurement points—that seems like a bad joke.
My facade looks unprofessional and poor, but it’s still within the standard???
What do you think about this? And yes, the final inspection has already taken place, but such work should not be handed over to a customer.
We have a newly built house and later noticed with regret that our facade is slightly uneven:
According to the construction company, it is annoying but within the acceptable range and less than 1mm.
After consulting my lawyer, he said that the DIN 18202 standard allows a tolerance of 7mm (0.28 inches) over 2m (6.56 feet), and only between measurement points—that seems like a bad joke.
My facade looks unprofessional and poor, but it’s still within the standard???
What do you think about this? And yes, the final inspection has already taken place, but such work should not be handed over to a customer.
B
Bieber081526 Oct 2017 17:21A lawyer might not be the right expert for this situation. I would look for a specialist, such as an expert in "façade damage" or "façade technology." Perhaps that would be more appropriate. They should provide an expert opinion, which can then be used to decide whether consulting a lawyer is worthwhile.
(I would definitely be dissatisfied, it doesn’t look professionally done.)
(I would definitely be dissatisfied, it doesn’t look professionally done.)
B
Bau-Schmidt26 Oct 2017 21:50Why don’t you hire an expert?
ypg schrieb:
Why start a new thread now? I’m wondering the same...
Steve_D schrieb:
Well, I went to my lawyer, and he said that DIN 18202 allows a tolerance of 7mm (0.28 inches) over 2m (6.6 feet), and only from one measured point to the next. That’s a bad joke. The joke is that this lawyer thinks he understands the standard correctly. Especially the phrase “and only from one measured point to the next” shows that he not only misread the table, but does not understand the basic terms. What is not a joke, however, is that in my opinion the standard is somewhat outdated: it is designed to evaluate sloping or uneven surfaces that have been constructed in a continuous manner. The specific issue with large-format panels producing surfaces that, as you can clearly see here, accentuate irregularities due to their regular pattern is, in my view, not sufficiently considered. You can practically see the outlines of individual ice floes from the moon in this case. I would argue that even a single judge without an expert witness could assess that the level of aesthetic acceptability has been exceeded here.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics