ᐅ Contracts Signed – Doubts Within the Cooling-Off Period
Created on: 28 Mar 2018 06:48
S
Stagenberger
I signed the contract with the bank and the developer last week and was initially optimistic.
But now I have some doubts about the developer. The reasons are:
1. Several negative reviews online (though almost as many positive ones as well), which I only discovered after signing the contract; if I had seen them beforehand, I might not have signed.
2. I don’t personally know anyone who has built with this company. However, most people say the company has a good reputation and that they are not aware of any negative experiences.
3. The originally very low-priced offer was somewhat optimistically estimated, as my architect friend pointed out (this is also one of the criticisms mentioned online). With additional corrections costing around 20,000 (about 22,000) it is now roughly at the same price level as the competition.
4. The bank representative almost let slip shortly before signing that there could possibly be problems with the loan-to-value ratio “due to the value of the house” (which ultimately did not occur).
5. I reviewed the offer from my second favorite developer and found that it actually offers slightly better services for almost the same price.
Why I originally chose this developer:
Good advice beforehand, detailed costs, they were the only ones to visit the plot, and I had a good feeling.
What would you do in my situation?
a) Have the contract reviewed again by other experts (second architect, second lawyer)?
b) ["Radical solution"] Withdraw from the contract and go with my second choice (a different developer, almost the same price)?
c) Build with the architect, which might be more expensive and would significantly delay the process since he currently has several large projects underway?
d) ?
But now I have some doubts about the developer. The reasons are:
1. Several negative reviews online (though almost as many positive ones as well), which I only discovered after signing the contract; if I had seen them beforehand, I might not have signed.
2. I don’t personally know anyone who has built with this company. However, most people say the company has a good reputation and that they are not aware of any negative experiences.
3. The originally very low-priced offer was somewhat optimistically estimated, as my architect friend pointed out (this is also one of the criticisms mentioned online). With additional corrections costing around 20,000 (about 22,000) it is now roughly at the same price level as the competition.
4. The bank representative almost let slip shortly before signing that there could possibly be problems with the loan-to-value ratio “due to the value of the house” (which ultimately did not occur).
5. I reviewed the offer from my second favorite developer and found that it actually offers slightly better services for almost the same price.
Why I originally chose this developer:
Good advice beforehand, detailed costs, they were the only ones to visit the plot, and I had a good feeling.
What would you do in my situation?
a) Have the contract reviewed again by other experts (second architect, second lawyer)?
b) ["Radical solution"] Withdraw from the contract and go with my second choice (a different developer, almost the same price)?
c) Build with the architect, which might be more expensive and would significantly delay the process since he currently has several large projects underway?
d) ?
77.willo schrieb:
Mercedes sells just over 2 million passenger cars per year. If they save as little as 0.1 cent on each one, that results in a profit increase of 2,000 euros—nobody would change a contract or make a phone call for that.Certainly not for 0.1 cent. But there have been cases where a difference of 1.5 cents led to choosing the other option. That was probably an extreme exception.
Knallkörper schrieb:
Generalities and trivialities don’t exactly prove your expertise. I prefer comparing Dacia with Mercedes. Sometimes they even use the same Renault engines, or the Mercedes rolls off the same Renault production line, or is sold as a Smart.
So what.
Those comparisons are just as inaccurate as they are valid. I’m not saying that a prefabricated house or a solid brick house are the same just because they have the same heating, ventilation, photovoltaic system, and equipment installed.
K
Knallkörper29 Mar 2018 11:28Spunk schrieb:
I prefer to compare Dacia with Mercedes. In some cases, they use the same Renault engines, or the Mercedes is basically assembled on the Renault production line or sold as a Smart.Smart and Citan are both definitely more Renault than Mercedes, but they do not represent the entire model range and are not representative. Drawing a comparison like "Dacia versus Mercedes" based on this is hardly serious. Furthermore, there is a diesel engine type 607, which is built by Renault according to Daimler’s specifications but is based on a Renault engine. It is certainly a piece of junk compared to the OM 642, but it is only installed in the absolute budget models like the A 160 CDI. Conclusion: everyone gets what they are willing to pay for. I want 6 or more cylinders, a diesel, and at least 300 horsepower — that’s something Dacia simply cannot offer at any price.
Well, then we are almost in agreement.
But it is equally unscientific to claim that something is automatically better just because it costs more. There is more to it than that. Entire libraries have been written about pricing and profit margins.
A 6-cylinder engine and 300 horsepower isn’t exactly the target market or price range for Dacia. On the other hand, the 1.5 cDi doesn’t seem too bad to offer something for customers in Mercedes-Benz’s price segment. And yes, it’s not exactly the same engine as in the Renault. Mercedes-Benz had a few additional requirements there.
Sorry for the off-topic and the nitpicking.
Maybe the topic of cars is too emotional in Germany as well. Maybe it would be better to argue about the Zott cream yogurt for €0.59 (approximately $0.64) versus the no-name cream yogurt for €0.39 (approximately $0.42), also bottled by Zott?
Looks the same, no big difference in taste. And the ingredients? And what conclusions can be drawn from that for a house price?
Knallkörper schrieb:
Comparing that to a "Dacia versus Mercedes" isn’t exactly a serious argument.
But it is equally unscientific to claim that something is automatically better just because it costs more. There is more to it than that. Entire libraries have been written about pricing and profit margins.
A 6-cylinder engine and 300 horsepower isn’t exactly the target market or price range for Dacia. On the other hand, the 1.5 cDi doesn’t seem too bad to offer something for customers in Mercedes-Benz’s price segment. And yes, it’s not exactly the same engine as in the Renault. Mercedes-Benz had a few additional requirements there.
Sorry for the off-topic and the nitpicking.
Maybe the topic of cars is too emotional in Germany as well. Maybe it would be better to argue about the Zott cream yogurt for €0.59 (approximately $0.64) versus the no-name cream yogurt for €0.39 (approximately $0.42), also bottled by Zott?
Looks the same, no big difference in taste. And the ingredients? And what conclusions can be drawn from that for a house price?
S
Stagenberger29 Mar 2018 13:34I see... now it’s only about cars :-)
But for me, the question is sufficiently answered.
But for me, the question is sufficiently answered.