Hello everyone,
Unfortunately, the structural contractor has incorrectly positioned the basement slab by about 20 cm (8 inches). The building authority came to inspect and has now temporarily stopped the construction.
There are two possible solutions to this problem:
1. Tear down the slab including the two walls that have already been poured and have everything redone correctly.
2. Submit a variation request and accept the situation as is.
Option 1 would be an extreme measure, which we naturally do not favor for practical reasons. So, basically, option 2 remains.
How should we approach this? The 20 cm (8 inches) error is significant because there are only 4 m (13 feet) left until the property boundary, where a carport is planned. It still fits, but there is much less "space" remaining. What would be a fair solution here (e.g., financial compensation from the construction company?), since a correction is no longer possible without demolition?
Thanks in advance for your advice!
Unfortunately, the structural contractor has incorrectly positioned the basement slab by about 20 cm (8 inches). The building authority came to inspect and has now temporarily stopped the construction.
There are two possible solutions to this problem:
1. Tear down the slab including the two walls that have already been poured and have everything redone correctly.
2. Submit a variation request and accept the situation as is.
Option 1 would be an extreme measure, which we naturally do not favor for practical reasons. So, basically, option 2 remains.
How should we approach this? The 20 cm (8 inches) error is significant because there are only 4 m (13 feet) left until the property boundary, where a carport is planned. It still fits, but there is much less "space" remaining. What would be a fair solution here (e.g., financial compensation from the construction company?), since a correction is no longer possible without demolition?
Thanks in advance for your advice!
ypg schrieb:
I would advise against threats!As I said, whether you want to do it or not is up to each individual. But I think I have read you advising against lawsuits/lawyers several times. Are you afraid of lawyers?I am aiming for a healthy balance here... there were at least three contractors who did not do their work properly for us, but I can’t sue all three... However, you shouldn’t have to accept everything, and if it ends up with a lawyer, it’s only because someone was unwilling to reach a compromise.
Snowy36 schrieb:
But you simply can’t let everything go, and if it ends up with a lawyer, it’s only because someone wasn’t willing to compromise That’s exactly what I mean. If the contractor builds the foundation slab incorrectly, it bothers me, and the contractor is unwilling to compromise—of course, I would consult a lawyer, because that’s exactly what they’re for. Especially in situations where the legal situation isn’t clear (like here, at what point of deviation in centimeters does a correction become necessary?), lawyers are there to clarify things. It’s not about immediately suing the tradespeople. A lawyer contacts the company, explains legally why the client insists on a foundation slab as specified in the plans, and sets a deadline. No contractor in the world would want to get into a legal dispute in such a case—it costs more money and stress than simply fixing the slab within two days or reaching a compromise with the client. You still have the right to insist on your position—or in this case, on an unsettled legal issue—that’s all I’m trying to say. It’s not as if once I involve a lawyer, everyone has to appear in court the next day.
Ben-man schrieb:
But I think I’ve read from you several times that you advised against lawsuits/lawyers. Are you afraid of lawyers? No, certainly not afraid. But through my work, I have some exposure to criminal law. Lawyers first earn their money by patiently writing letters. Whether they achieve anything with that or not: first, there is a lot of talking... But what does this have to do with what I wrote here? It’s about weighing options and proportionality in a dispute, and a lawyer is not the one to make that decision!
ypg schrieb:
Weighing and Proportionality in Case of DisputesExactly. And if you were to live in a house for the rest of your life that wasn’t built according to your plans and the building permit/planning permission granted by the authorities, because the structural builder made mistakes and refuses to fix them, wouldn’t you try to have a lawyer resolve the issue?Ben-man schrieb:
It’s not like just because I involve a lawyer, everyone has to appear in court the very next day. It’s not that something happens immediately. As mentioned before: first, if not ordered otherwise by the regulatory authority, the lawyer will stop any further construction. Then a letter is sent to the general contractor, preferably by fax or email. The contractor has 10 days to respond. If the contractor deliberately drags it out, time passes and the homeowners’ nerves are worn thin because nothing happens on the construction site during that period.
Ben-man schrieb:
Exactly. And if you were going to live in a house for the rest of your life that wasn’t built as you planned and approved by the authorities, because the shell builder messed up and refuses to fix it, wouldn’t you try to have a lawyer resolve it? Hold on. This isn’t about the entire house, it’s about 20 cm over 4 meters. As already stated, that may be frustrating, but the original poster seemed to prefer option 2 anyway.
It’s always easy in a forum to insist on legal action (that is, to post "option 1" in this case) when you’re not in the same situation and don’t have to weigh the pros and cons as the original poster did here. Fortunately, they were able to reach an agreement or the contractor ended up at a disadvantage.
Personally, I probably would have had them pay for a nice carport—at 3.80 meters (12 feet 6 inches), of course.
Similar topics