ᐅ Contracting out individual trades yourself – what savings can this bring?
Created on: 16 Feb 2017 18:47
K
kaho674
When planning our next house, we’re wondering (as a family) whether and how much you could save by contracting the trades yourself and supervising the construction on your own. You definitely need an architect for the documentation and so on, but after managing three houses, you could probably do without a site manager. Right? But how much can you actually save this way, we’re asking ourselves. Fees or percentages weren’t clearly visible on the invoice.
E
elVincent20 Feb 2017 14:56Back to the main topic: We are currently building and are in the final stages. The trades were contracted and supervised individually. My impression is that it is crucial to establish a good rapport with the responsible people in the hired companies. We ended up working with relatively small and, in some cases, already familiar companies, where you tend to feel that one person stands behind the results and works better due to this personal accountability.
Of course, we also spent a lot of time on site and were always available to answer questions or clarify any uncertainties. Additionally, I invested a great deal of time researching to understand everything and be able to question it myself. At the moment, I am still convinced that everything delivered has been done well to very well.
Regarding costs, I think you have somewhat more control, but in the end, it does not become significantly cheaper. After all, you want the best of everything, which leads to more scrutiny of the scope and services of each trade, resulting in a good compromise between price and quality. With turnkey construction, you rarely get the best solutions, but rather the best compromise between effort and outcome, from the perspective of the companies involved in the construction.
My conclusion would be that managing the contracts yourself works but requires a lot of time, is not necessarily cheaper, but the overall quality of the result is higher.
Of course, we also spent a lot of time on site and were always available to answer questions or clarify any uncertainties. Additionally, I invested a great deal of time researching to understand everything and be able to question it myself. At the moment, I am still convinced that everything delivered has been done well to very well.
Regarding costs, I think you have somewhat more control, but in the end, it does not become significantly cheaper. After all, you want the best of everything, which leads to more scrutiny of the scope and services of each trade, resulting in a good compromise between price and quality. With turnkey construction, you rarely get the best solutions, but rather the best compromise between effort and outcome, from the perspective of the companies involved in the construction.
My conclusion would be that managing the contracts yourself works but requires a lot of time, is not necessarily cheaper, but the overall quality of the result is higher.
Evolith schrieb:
Just as a side note: We had to change from a hip roof to a half-hip roof due to the zoning plan. Additional cost: 7000 €. In that case, the blame lies (at the latest) with your contracting partner; they obviously couldn’t interpret the zoning plan correctly...
Iktinos schrieb:
Then it is (at the latest) your contracting party’s fault; they obviously couldn’t read the development plan .... Yep. But that doesn’t help. We either have to pay or take legal action. At least they’ve agreed to cover half.
Evolith schrieb:
At least he promised to cover half of it
At least. It is also more attractive.elVincent schrieb:
My conclusion would be that self-contracting works but requires a lot of time, usually isn’t cheaper in the end, yet the overall result is of higher quality. I think I could agree with that opinion.
kaho674 schrieb:
At least that. It’s also nicer looking. We are very pleased with our half-hipped roof. It has a bit of a coastal house vibe, and as someone from a fishing region, I immediately feel at home there [emoji38]