ᐅ Completion Date in a General Contractor Agreement – Wording Guide
Created on: 28 May 2019 21:26
G
goalkeeper
Hello everyone,
Our general contractor agreement states that the property will be ready for occupancy 10 months after construction starts, with the completion date set at 12 months.
However, we want to phrase this clause so that the property must be ready for occupancy within 2020 under any circumstances, as otherwise we won’t qualify for the homebuyer subsidy. Another issue is that the site development work is still ongoing, but according to the project manager, it should be finished by September. This also needs to be included somehow in the clause.
Can anyone knowledgeable assist here?
Our general contractor agreement states that the property will be ready for occupancy 10 months after construction starts, with the completion date set at 12 months.
However, we want to phrase this clause so that the property must be ready for occupancy within 2020 under any circumstances, as otherwise we won’t qualify for the homebuyer subsidy. Another issue is that the site development work is still ongoing, but according to the project manager, it should be finished by September. This also needs to be included somehow in the clause.
Can anyone knowledgeable assist here?
HilfeHilfe schrieb:
hmm, fraud??? Come on now... You can easily move in even if not all rooms are finished or the exterior plaster is done. No one moves into a construction site without a toilet, heating, and water.
Basically, the original poster has enough time. If construction starts in the fall, there are 15-16 months until the registration confirmation must be issued.
What you always think
Whether it states completion 12 months from the start of construction or by the end of 2020 doesn’t matter if you begin in the fall. Both you and the contractor must also stick to the construction start date. I would phrase it more like this:
“Construction start immediately after ... (What is the last thing that must be in place before your general contractor can start?)” and “Completion 12 months from construction start.”
But even this is just wording and does not guarantee you child benefit subsidies or moving in before the end of 2020! These formulations aren’t worth the paper they’re written on, believe me!
H
HilfeHilfe29 May 2019 09:09goalkeeper schrieb:
How is that fraud if I actually live there? But the discussion is taking a strange turn now.Well, I just feel like threads are often started to discuss ways to cleverly take advantage of subsidies.So, I don’t support that.
HilfeHilfe schrieb:
Well, I just feel like threads are often started to find ways to cleverly take advantage of subsidies.
So, I don’t support that.I don’t think that’s the case here, it’s just a tight situation, nothing more. The original poster can only influence it to a limited extent—just one difficult neighbor who objects to the roof overhang or something similar, and construction is put on hold. Or there are quality issues and the builder themself hits the brakes.Anything is possible, including everything running smoothly.
Zaba12 schrieb:
I don’t see it that way in this case, it’s just a tight fit, nothing more.But why should the builder be held responsible for this, especially when a financial bonus is only guaranteed to the client until 2020? I find this demand almost unethical. Given the background information, to me it means: nice to have, but if not, then so be it.
Possibly with a penalty clause as well... something doesn’t add up when unrealistic demands are made.
Besides, the lawyer would have already highlighted that clause in red for €220/hour if it were negotiable.
You haven’t answered my question yet
[QUOTE="ypg schrieb:
Have you planned any self-performed work? Flooring? Electrical installations? G
goalkeeper29 May 2019 10:20ypg schrieb:
But why should the general contractor be held responsible for this when a government housing grant only applies to the homeowner until 2020?
I find this demand almost unethical. With this background knowledge, the thought means to me: nice to have, but if not, then so be it.
Maybe with a penalty clause... something sounds off when unrealistic demands are made.
Besides, the lawyer would have already highlighted that clause in red for €220/hour if it were negotiable. As I said – it’s not about demanding a penalty clause – we don’t want that and no builder in our region would agree to it.
The lawyer marked the clause and recommended that we agree on a fixed move-in date. However, our general contractor said it would be difficult to set a fixed move-in date if the development infrastructure work is not yet completed. And that’s what the whole discussion is about – nothing more and nothing less. I haven’t asked for anything else – but so much is being read into it and assumed, it’s really unbelievable at times.
And seriously now: anyone who thinks someone builds solely because of the government housing grant is really out of touch with reality. Given today’s construction costs, it’s just a drop in the bucket, though of course it’s gladly accepted. Even if politicians like to present it differently. The housing grant is certainly not a main reason to build.
@ypg no, we let the general contractor handle everything.
goalkeeper schrieb:
And now seriously: anyone who thinks that anyone builds a house because of the construction child benefit is really out of touch with reality. With today’s construction costs, it’s just a drop in the bucket, but of course, people are happy to take it.But you have to understand that the contractor cannot simply commit to something in the contract that is beyond their control. What you want—that clause—would be considered void in any contract, as they cannot predict the future and promise something they simply cannot guarantee.