R
Raffaderalte30 Apr 2022 16:22Hello dear forum community,
We are currently building a detached house with a regional solid construction company.
We are just about to have the screed installed. Problem: we live 400 km (250 miles) away from the construction site.
Now some issues have come up that are not really being addressed.
1) As requested and shown in the execution plan, we wanted a dormer. Instead, we received a cross gable.
The construction company is now apparently trying to get the cross gable retroactively approved, but this was absolutely not what we wanted. Because the house is built on a slope, the cross gable makes it look even more like a block.
For the construction company, it seems that once the approval is obtained, the matter is settled.
2) Again about this dormer/gable:
The rafter at the top of the dormer was delivered too short. Because of this, it does not rest on the perpendicular wall below it, but a kind of concrete column was poured instead, on which a beam rests, which in turn supports the rafter. However, about 1 m (3 feet) further, there is the bedroom door, and now the concrete column stands exactly in the walking path.
3) We are building with a ventilation system. The ventilation outlets in the attic are not shown in the execution plans because they are supposed to be installed in the floor (at least, that's what we were told). However, the walls planned by the architect, which are 17.5 cm (7 inches) thick, seem to be too thin for the ventilation pipes and exhaust outlets. Only the supply air goes into the floor. Therefore, drywall boxes have to be installed along the walls everywhere to cover these pipes.
These are the three things that bother me the most. Do I really have to just accept it “as is”? Allegedly it’s “not a big deal,” but it bothers me quite a bit.
How is this usually handled in such cases?
Thank you!
Best regards and have a nice evening.
Raffaderalte
We are currently building a detached house with a regional solid construction company.
We are just about to have the screed installed. Problem: we live 400 km (250 miles) away from the construction site.
Now some issues have come up that are not really being addressed.
1) As requested and shown in the execution plan, we wanted a dormer. Instead, we received a cross gable.
The construction company is now apparently trying to get the cross gable retroactively approved, but this was absolutely not what we wanted. Because the house is built on a slope, the cross gable makes it look even more like a block.
For the construction company, it seems that once the approval is obtained, the matter is settled.
2) Again about this dormer/gable:
The rafter at the top of the dormer was delivered too short. Because of this, it does not rest on the perpendicular wall below it, but a kind of concrete column was poured instead, on which a beam rests, which in turn supports the rafter. However, about 1 m (3 feet) further, there is the bedroom door, and now the concrete column stands exactly in the walking path.
3) We are building with a ventilation system. The ventilation outlets in the attic are not shown in the execution plans because they are supposed to be installed in the floor (at least, that's what we were told). However, the walls planned by the architect, which are 17.5 cm (7 inches) thick, seem to be too thin for the ventilation pipes and exhaust outlets. Only the supply air goes into the floor. Therefore, drywall boxes have to be installed along the walls everywhere to cover these pipes.
These are the three things that bother me the most. Do I really have to just accept it “as is”? Allegedly it’s “not a big deal,” but it bothers me quite a bit.
How is this usually handled in such cases?
Thank you!
Best regards and have a nice evening.
Raffaderalte
Raffaderalte schrieb:
What is the usual approach here?From your side, first make the words understandable with drawings or images. I am currently 400 km (250 miles) away and can’t really picture the concrete pillar :-(https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
N
Neubau202230 Apr 2022 16:51Raffaderalte schrieb:
These are the three things that bother me the most. Do I really just have to accept them "as is"? Supposedly none of it is serious, but some of it bothers me a lot.
What is the usual approach in this situation?
It’s quite simple. You hire an independent construction supervisor. The site is 400 km (250 miles) away and you have no one overseeing the build? That’s quite negligent...
N
NatureSys30 Apr 2022 17:02Rafters that are too short should definitely not be accepted. It is best to point out the issue immediately and have it corrected.
Good evening!
Excuse me? What is going on here? Why are you allowing such nonsense? You are the client and therefore the project owner; nothing can happen without your approval and authorization. The house is built solely according to the approved construction plans. Any deviation must be pointed out by you and corrected!
However, it is true that if you are sitting 400 km (250 miles) away without an inspector/expert/whoever on site, they will probably think, "You can get away with this with them..." This is more than just critical!
What makes me suspicious is:
Could it be that you are building with a property developer? If you are working with a general contractor and are therefore the owners, you would have to submit the application for retroactive approval yourselves. The general contractor can only prepare it for you.
So, first question:
General contractor or property developer?
And regarding those three points: I would not even consider accepting any of them for a single second! That is completely absurd!
Best regards,
Andreas
Excuse me? What is going on here? Why are you allowing such nonsense? You are the client and therefore the project owner; nothing can happen without your approval and authorization. The house is built solely according to the approved construction plans. Any deviation must be pointed out by you and corrected!
However, it is true that if you are sitting 400 km (250 miles) away without an inspector/expert/whoever on site, they will probably think, "You can get away with this with them..." This is more than just critical!
What makes me suspicious is:
Raffaderalte schrieb:
The construction company is now apparently applying for retroactive approval of the dormer, but it was absolutely not what we wanted.
Could it be that you are building with a property developer? If you are working with a general contractor and are therefore the owners, you would have to submit the application for retroactive approval yourselves. The general contractor can only prepare it for you.
So, first question:
General contractor or property developer?
And regarding those three points: I would not even consider accepting any of them for a single second! That is completely absurd!
Best regards,
Andreas
Similar topics