ᐅ Having a Construction Contract Reviewed / By Whom? Is It Necessary?
Created on: 13 May 2022 11:28
A
Andreas_79
Hello everyone,
After endless reading, searching, discussions, and so on, we are slowly reaching the final phase of our house building project, although it really only begins at this point 🙂
We are now in the final stages with three providers and would like to sign something within the next four weeks if it fits, which looks likely at the moment. This brought up the question for me: who actually reviews the construction contract?
I checked online, and the consumer advice center in NRW currently does not offer contract reviews. Who else can I turn to? Is it even necessary to have such a contract reviewed, and do the major providers make any changes to the contract if we raise concerns? I suspect these are always the same standard terms and conditions, or do they vary from project to project?
How have you handled this? I am neither a lawyer nor an expert, and with such an amount of money involved, I would like to have a bit more security.
Best regards,
Andreas
After endless reading, searching, discussions, and so on, we are slowly reaching the final phase of our house building project, although it really only begins at this point 🙂
We are now in the final stages with three providers and would like to sign something within the next four weeks if it fits, which looks likely at the moment. This brought up the question for me: who actually reviews the construction contract?
I checked online, and the consumer advice center in NRW currently does not offer contract reviews. Who else can I turn to? Is it even necessary to have such a contract reviewed, and do the major providers make any changes to the contract if we raise concerns? I suspect these are always the same standard terms and conditions, or do they vary from project to project?
How have you handled this? I am neither a lawyer nor an expert, and with such an amount of money involved, I would like to have a bit more security.
Best regards,
Andreas
Nida35a schrieb:
Additionally, I meant the insolvency clause, in our case for example like this,
so that you don’t have to dispute ownership with an insolvency administrator. You almost always end up disputing with insolvency administrators. Unfortunately, this is the area of law (apart from administrative law) where the most arrogant sticklers tend to gather. Saying “in doubt, rule in favor of the administrator” is a bit of an oversimplification, but it basically captures the main principle of insolvency law. Defense clauses are only worth as much as their author, who needs to be a very experienced specialist (and even then, you have to prepare for legal action). For the judges involved, this is not an easy field either. But feel free to share an example of your insolvency clause and mention from which year it has been considered sufficiently effective.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
The photo of the clause with a warning addressed to me was removed.
Now the 2018 text reads,
“The client has the right to terminate the contract for good cause if the contractor files for insolvency proceedings or a comparable procedure.”
This clause should immediately and effectively release us from the main contractor.
Now the 2018 text reads,
“The client has the right to terminate the contract for good cause if the contractor files for insolvency proceedings or a comparable procedure.”
This clause should immediately and effectively release us from the main contractor.
Nida35a schrieb:
"The client has the right to terminate the contract for cause if the contractor files for insolvency proceedings or a comparable procedure."
This clause should immediately and legally separate us from the general contractor. From the moment the right of termination is exercised, yes. However, up until that point, services will have already been provided, to which the well-known double standard applies: as a creditor, the client will be paid later and proportionally, while as a debtor, they must pay immediately and in full. Set-offs are not possible; certainly not on a one-to-one basis as the client, who is usually a layperson in legal matters, might assume. This regularly leads to disputes. Such a clause is therefore only truly secure for the client who senses the issue before any services from the contractor have been provided. Practically, this means the client must check insolvency announcements daily to be able to terminate before performance begins. Even experienced businesspeople do not always manage this. And as you correctly pointed out, this clause can only serve as an additional measure; it cannot replace a completion guarantee.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Nida35a schrieb:
The photo of the clause with a warning to me has been removed.
Now in text from 2018,
"The client has the right to terminate the contract for cause if the contractor files for insolvency proceedings or a comparable process."
This clause should immediately and legally separate us from the general contractor. We also have a similar clause included. On one hand:
Without prejudice to the provisions in §8 VOB/B, the client is entitled to immediate termination if ... insolvency or comparable proceedings have been filed due to the contractor’s inability to pay. And furthermore:
... in the event of extraordinary termination by the client attributable to the contractor, the contractor is only entitled to payment for the services already performed by him...