Good evening,
as the title says, our new build (shell construction) was completely botched in autumn 2018 and now needs to be repaired. In the course of this renovation, we are considering changes to the staircase (which should be carried out by a third party).
1. In June 2019, the basement was flooded with nearly 50 cm (20 inches) of groundwater in the solid concrete basement for about 2 weeks.
2. Bricks not laid according to Wienerberger guidelines (instead of thin-bed mortar, 5 mm (0.2 inches) or wider joints).
3. Flat roof was executed incorrectly – tapered insulation not installed according to the installation plan and then cut afterwards to create a slope.
4. Basement was excavated over 50 cm (20 inches) too shallow – consequence: the house is too high according to the allotment garden law and is not consolidated.
Suing the company is not an option – costs for legal proceedings would be enormous and lengthy – lasting for years – and the company could file for bankruptcy at any time. The result would be that we would still be stuck with the court costs. We have already consulted six construction law attorneys. We cannot afford to demolish and rebuild the house, although we will always be uncertain about water leakage in the basement. We live near a river, and high groundwater is a recurring issue every spring after the snow melt. We are completely desperate.
The building authority does not help: despite the clearly wrong height. According to a new submission plan by the construction company, it is supposedly approved, even though it is clearly too high (according to recent surveying by a certified surveying office). It all sounds like a bad movie, but it is true.
The defects became apparent starting in summer 2019, and since then we have had an expert involved.
Our only option is to play along and reach a consensus with the construction company. We have already paid about 250,000 EUR (approximately) for the shell construction.
The floor plan is an external dimension of 8.3 m x 6.15 m (27.2 ft x 20.2 ft).
The staircase from the ground floor to the basement is about 4 m (13 ft) long and 1.3 m (4 ft 3 in) wide, very uncomfortable concrete steps. (26 cm (10 inches) tread, 18 cm (7 inches) riser).
We are considering hiring an architect again to change the staircase to possibly a 2 x 2 m (6.5 ft x 6.5 ft) half-turn or slightly rotated. We have no joy with the whole house anymore. The stair width should also be a maximum of 90 cm (3 ft), not 130 cm (4 ft 3 in).
On one short side there is a 4 m (13 ft) kitchen and a 1.5 m (5 ft) WC. Then the dining area faces the long side and the living area is there. There would be a 3 x 2.2 m (9.8 ft x 7.2 ft) lift-and-slide door on the other short side.
In the middle of this whole mess, doubts arise about the floor plan and the staircase. We have two schoolchildren and a toddler and wanted to be living in the house since last autumn.
Sorry for the long post. I can only upload the plan next week.
Please share your opinions on changing the staircase (this would involve demolition of the existing one and widening but shortening the stairwell).
as the title says, our new build (shell construction) was completely botched in autumn 2018 and now needs to be repaired. In the course of this renovation, we are considering changes to the staircase (which should be carried out by a third party).
1. In June 2019, the basement was flooded with nearly 50 cm (20 inches) of groundwater in the solid concrete basement for about 2 weeks.
2. Bricks not laid according to Wienerberger guidelines (instead of thin-bed mortar, 5 mm (0.2 inches) or wider joints).
3. Flat roof was executed incorrectly – tapered insulation not installed according to the installation plan and then cut afterwards to create a slope.
4. Basement was excavated over 50 cm (20 inches) too shallow – consequence: the house is too high according to the allotment garden law and is not consolidated.
Suing the company is not an option – costs for legal proceedings would be enormous and lengthy – lasting for years – and the company could file for bankruptcy at any time. The result would be that we would still be stuck with the court costs. We have already consulted six construction law attorneys. We cannot afford to demolish and rebuild the house, although we will always be uncertain about water leakage in the basement. We live near a river, and high groundwater is a recurring issue every spring after the snow melt. We are completely desperate.
The building authority does not help: despite the clearly wrong height. According to a new submission plan by the construction company, it is supposedly approved, even though it is clearly too high (according to recent surveying by a certified surveying office). It all sounds like a bad movie, but it is true.
The defects became apparent starting in summer 2019, and since then we have had an expert involved.
Our only option is to play along and reach a consensus with the construction company. We have already paid about 250,000 EUR (approximately) for the shell construction.
The floor plan is an external dimension of 8.3 m x 6.15 m (27.2 ft x 20.2 ft).
The staircase from the ground floor to the basement is about 4 m (13 ft) long and 1.3 m (4 ft 3 in) wide, very uncomfortable concrete steps. (26 cm (10 inches) tread, 18 cm (7 inches) riser).
We are considering hiring an architect again to change the staircase to possibly a 2 x 2 m (6.5 ft x 6.5 ft) half-turn or slightly rotated. We have no joy with the whole house anymore. The stair width should also be a maximum of 90 cm (3 ft), not 130 cm (4 ft 3 in).
On one short side there is a 4 m (13 ft) kitchen and a 1.5 m (5 ft) WC. Then the dining area faces the long side and the living area is there. There would be a 3 x 2.2 m (9.8 ft x 7.2 ft) lift-and-slide door on the other short side.
In the middle of this whole mess, doubts arise about the floor plan and the staircase. We have two schoolchildren and a toddler and wanted to be living in the house since last autumn.
Sorry for the long post. I can only upload the plan next week.
Please share your opinions on changing the staircase (this would involve demolition of the existing one and widening but shortening the stairwell).
L
Laurasstern13 Feb 2020 07:30danixf schrieb:
So what? Isn’t that what courts are for? I honestly cannot imagine a company simply declaring bankruptcy. Austria is not some third-world country where anything goes.
Whether it's cheap or not doesn’t matter at all. The fact is that the basement must be waterproof given the local conditions. How you achieve that doesn’t matter to me as long as an independent expert approves it.
It should comply with DIN EN 1996-1-1. From the way you describe it, it doesn’t seem professionally done, but the building definitely won’t collapse because of that. That would be my least concern. Yes, a company can file for bankruptcy at any time. It takes about a week, and one day later they can start a new company under a different name and continue their ongoing business. And the liabilities are gone. All our lawyers have confirmed this. Austria is basically a banana republic.
The Chamber of Commerce can’t do anything. They keep botching their work and don’t care.
Court proceedings take forever: a lawyer is still working on a case from 2011... and even if there is a final court ruling after years, the company can still go bankrupt, and you are left with nothing but legal and attorney fees.
danixf schrieb:
So what? What is the purpose of a court then? I simply can’t imagine a company just filing for bankruptcy. Austria isn’t some third world country where anything goes. Germany isn’t a third world country either, and there it’s common practice. Don’t take it the wrong way, but you still sound a bit inexperienced. Courts exist, but there are no real rulings anymore. Lawsuits often take nearly 10 years or longer. There is no functioning rule of law anymore, especially when it comes to construction matters.
Taking legal action should be the last resort.
It is expensive and the outcome is uncertain.
I just don’t understand why, as a layperson, you wouldn’t get the necessary support from an expert or construction manager/site manager before starting the build. That would have saved a lot of money and stress here.
@laurastern, this is not meant to sound sarcastic. I think what happened to you is terrible. Please stay active and warn other homeowners who decide to forgo their own site management and expert advice. You should have a professional working on behalf of the homeowner.
It is expensive and the outcome is uncertain.
I just don’t understand why, as a layperson, you wouldn’t get the necessary support from an expert or construction manager/site manager before starting the build. That would have saved a lot of money and stress here.
@laurastern, this is not meant to sound sarcastic. I think what happened to you is terrible. Please stay active and warn other homeowners who decide to forgo their own site management and expert advice. You should have a professional working on behalf of the homeowner.
Laurasstern schrieb:
Why should WE as the clients, who contractually agreed on a defect-free building and UNFORTUNATELY ALREADY PAID for it, have to pay AGAIN for a roof and tiles incorrectly installed by the construction company??? No, you shouldn’t, and I never said you should.
My point is to understand how extensive the effort would be to redo the roof – which tasks would have to be carried out again, what materials would need to be removed and then reinstalled. From your explanation, it’s not clear to me whether there is actually a technical defect (leakage) or if it’s just an aesthetic issue, with a little water pooling but otherwise still waterproof.
Without an actual technical defect, proportionality will ultimately decide what can still be repaired on the roof.
Laurasstern schrieb:
Of course, there is still capital – we only agreed on the shell construction. The rest up to moving in, including interior and exterior plastering, floor coverings, walls, kitchen, bathrooms, interior staircases, furniture, rooftop terrace, garden landscaping, etc., all need to be planned for... No, I’m referring to the money that remains beyond that. Specifically, what you want to use for the later staircase modifications. That could also be spent on a second or even third opinion on the best way to waterproof the basement. Because the shell builder will only do repairs. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the best solution. The best solution could be something that wasn’t even planned originally but now would be better, although it might cause extra costs. That’s what I meant.
Laurasstern schrieb:
If all this is NOT a total loss, WHAT do YOU consider one? For me, a total loss would be if you had to dismantle the structure due to height issues and the shell builder declared bankruptcy at the same time. Then the 250,000€ would really be lost. But currently, a solution is being worked on. It’s a total loss for your nerves, but objectively, the project can still be saved.
L
Laurasstern13 Feb 2020 20:10haydee schrieb:
Taking legal action would be a last resort.
Expensive and uncertain outcome.
I just don’t understand why someone without expertise doesn’t seek the necessary help from an expert or a construction manager/site manager before starting construction. That would have saved a lot of money and stress here.
@laurastern, I don’t mean this to sound harsh. I think what happened to you is terrible. Please keep being active and warn other homeowners who choose to forgo their own construction management and expert consultation. It’s important to have a professional working for the homeowner. haydee,
you are absolutely right – we should have hired a construction manager or an expert. We spent 10 years considering, talking to companies, and planning, and then our own "courage" to finally start somehow froze us. Everything happened so quickly, and we could hardly believe we were actually building now.
Similar topics