U
underfree14 Jul 2015 23:13Hello,
we had our walls wallpapered by a painting company because we did not feel confident doing it ourselves. However, we are not satisfied with the final result at all; we probably could have done it just as well on our own. We did not choose the cheapest option, nor the most expensive—the quote was 5.95 euros per m² (5.95 euros per 10.8 square feet), which was mid-range.
Already painted by us:
Not painted yet:
Additional defects:
On one occasion, too much wallpaper was cut off at the bottom, so there was a gap above the skirting board. They simply glued more wallpaper on afterwards.
Would you accept this? Is this professional workmanship?
I would be very grateful for your feedback!
we had our walls wallpapered by a painting company because we did not feel confident doing it ourselves. However, we are not satisfied with the final result at all; we probably could have done it just as well on our own. We did not choose the cheapest option, nor the most expensive—the quote was 5.95 euros per m² (5.95 euros per 10.8 square feet), which was mid-range.
Already painted by us:
Not painted yet:
Additional defects:
On one occasion, too much wallpaper was cut off at the bottom, so there was a gap above the skirting board. They simply glued more wallpaper on afterwards.
Would you accept this? Is this professional workmanship?
I would be very grateful for your feedback!
B
Bauexperte14 Jul 2015 23:33Good evening,
Did you award the contract through a well-known platform? Was there an official invoice? That determines whether you can make a claim. I wouldn’t accept the work as it is; it looks like too little adhesive was used and no seam roller was applied.
I only know of craftsmen HOURS as a billing basis; why did you agree on square meters?
Regards, Bauexperte
Did you award the contract through a well-known platform? Was there an official invoice? That determines whether you can make a claim. I wouldn’t accept the work as it is; it looks like too little adhesive was used and no seam roller was applied.
I only know of craftsmen HOURS as a billing basis; why did you agree on square meters?
Regards, Bauexperte
Bauexperte schrieb:
Good evening,
Did you hire through a well-known platform? At least with an official invoice? Whether you can make a complaint depends on that.Yes and no. Although the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) reversed its previous ruling in 2013, consequential damages from defects can still potentially be claimed.
If undeclared work causes damage to the client’s other property that goes beyond the actual completed work—so-called consequential damages from defects—tort claims remain valid.
An undeclared worker who does not properly install the roof is no longer required to fix it. However, they must pay compensation if, during the next summer storm, a valuable art collection is damaged due to the leaking roof.In the case of poor wallpapering, consequential damages are of course hard to imagine.
Kind regards
Dirk Grafe
B
Bauexperte14 Jul 2015 23:57Hello Dirk,
Yes, I still have that saved in my folder. It was mentioned in Handelsblatt as follows:
However, in cases of undeclared work, there is no entitlement to remedial work, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decided, finally rejecting the homeowner's claim on Thursday. From a legal perspective, the contract between the two parties is not valid. The ruling mainly concerns the private sector of undeclared work, which experts believe makes up a significant portion of the so-called underground economy.
Edit: this is also interesting:
Undeclared Work Is Not Paid
The Seventh Civil Senate, responsible among other things for construction contract law, ruled today that a contractor who knowingly violates Section 1 Paragraph 2 No. 2 of the Act to Combat Undeclared Work (Schwarzarbeitsbekämpfungsgesetz*) cannot claim any payment for their work.
In 2010, the defendant commissioned the plaintiff to carry out electrical installation work. A contract sum of €13,800 including VAT was agreed, as well as an additional payment of €5,000 in cash for which no invoice was to be issued. The plaintiff completed the work, but the defendant only paid part of the agreed amounts.
The Higher Regional Court dismissed the claim. The Seventh Civil Senate confirmed the appellate court's decision.
Both the plaintiff and the defendant knowingly violated Section 1 Paragraph 2 No. 2 of the Act to Combat Undeclared Work by agreeing that no invoice would be issued and no VAT paid for the additional €5,000 cash payment beyond the contractually agreed remuneration. The entire contract is therefore void due to violation of a legal prohibition, meaning there is no entitlement to contractual payment (BGH, judgment of August 1, 2013 – VII ZR 6/13, NJW 2013, 3167).
The plaintiff also has no claim for restitution of the enrichment of the defendant resulting from the fact that he received the work. Although a contractor who has performed services under a void contract may generally demand return of those services from the client, or compensation if return is not possible, this does not apply under Section 817 sentence 2 of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, BGB)** if the contractor violated a legal prohibition by performing the service. This is the case here. In line with the objective of the Act to Combat Undeclared Work to prevent undeclared employment, not only is the contractual agreement between the parties illegal, but also the service performed in execution of this agreement.
The application of Section 817 sentence 2 BGB is not contradicted by the principles of good faith. Enforcing the goals pursued by the legislator with the Act to Combat Undeclared Work, namely to effectively curb undeclared employment, requires strict application of this provision. Consequently, a different view than that previously held by the Senate regarding a restitution claim following undeclared work, which was assessed under the old version of the law (BGH, judgment of May 31, 1990 – VII ZR 336/89, BGHZ 111, 308), is appropriate.
Source: Federal Court of Justice
Regards, Bauexperte
Dirk Grafe schrieb:
Yes and no. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) made a turnaround in 2013 compared to the previous regulation,
Yes, I still have that saved in my folder. It was mentioned in Handelsblatt as follows:
However, in cases of undeclared work, there is no entitlement to remedial work, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decided, finally rejecting the homeowner's claim on Thursday. From a legal perspective, the contract between the two parties is not valid. The ruling mainly concerns the private sector of undeclared work, which experts believe makes up a significant portion of the so-called underground economy.
Edit: this is also interesting:
Undeclared Work Is Not Paid
The Seventh Civil Senate, responsible among other things for construction contract law, ruled today that a contractor who knowingly violates Section 1 Paragraph 2 No. 2 of the Act to Combat Undeclared Work (Schwarzarbeitsbekämpfungsgesetz*) cannot claim any payment for their work.
In 2010, the defendant commissioned the plaintiff to carry out electrical installation work. A contract sum of €13,800 including VAT was agreed, as well as an additional payment of €5,000 in cash for which no invoice was to be issued. The plaintiff completed the work, but the defendant only paid part of the agreed amounts.
The Higher Regional Court dismissed the claim. The Seventh Civil Senate confirmed the appellate court's decision.
Both the plaintiff and the defendant knowingly violated Section 1 Paragraph 2 No. 2 of the Act to Combat Undeclared Work by agreeing that no invoice would be issued and no VAT paid for the additional €5,000 cash payment beyond the contractually agreed remuneration. The entire contract is therefore void due to violation of a legal prohibition, meaning there is no entitlement to contractual payment (BGH, judgment of August 1, 2013 – VII ZR 6/13, NJW 2013, 3167).
The plaintiff also has no claim for restitution of the enrichment of the defendant resulting from the fact that he received the work. Although a contractor who has performed services under a void contract may generally demand return of those services from the client, or compensation if return is not possible, this does not apply under Section 817 sentence 2 of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, BGB)** if the contractor violated a legal prohibition by performing the service. This is the case here. In line with the objective of the Act to Combat Undeclared Work to prevent undeclared employment, not only is the contractual agreement between the parties illegal, but also the service performed in execution of this agreement.
The application of Section 817 sentence 2 BGB is not contradicted by the principles of good faith. Enforcing the goals pursued by the legislator with the Act to Combat Undeclared Work, namely to effectively curb undeclared employment, requires strict application of this provision. Consequently, a different view than that previously held by the Senate regarding a restitution claim following undeclared work, which was assessed under the old version of the law (BGH, judgment of May 31, 1990 – VII ZR 336/89, BGHZ 111, 308), is appropriate.
Source: Federal Court of Justice
Regards, Bauexperte
U
underfree14 Jul 2015 23:59No, it wasn’t done through any online platform. We requested quotes from three local painters. All three bids were given as a price per square meter. We have not yet received the final invoice. The work was completed yesterday, and today we gave the supervisor our feedback over the phone. He hasn’t seen the results himself yet. Tomorrow, someone will come by to paint one wall themselves and inspect the wall we painted. Then apparently another person will also provide their feedback… I just know that if the individual strips are still that visible afterward, I would want it redone or actually refuse to pay for it. I don’t think a seam roller was used. We also kept all the windows closed. Is it normal for many bubbles to appear in the textured wallpaper immediately after wallpapering, which then disappear overnight? From my experience, the strips are usually smoothed out.
B
Bauexperte15 Jul 2015 00:02underfree schrieb:
Is it normal to see many bubbles in the textured wallpaper right after hanging it, which then disappear overnight? Yes. That’s not a problem—I’m not a professional painter, but I’ve hung enough wallpaper in my life.
Wait until the scheduled appointments before you pay. The professional can’t be so blind as to not notice such an obvious defect. I’m also not sure why it was painted over? Was the intention to mask the seams?
Regards, Bauexperte
Similar topics