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
Laurasstern17 Feb 2020 15:24Pinkiponk schrieb:
Basically, I believe that people who work well, reliably, responsibly, and professionally—whether as employees, homemakers, mothers/fathers, or self-employed—simply assume that others do the same, since they move in similar environments. That’s why I understand LaurasStern very well, even though I can’t assess the situation in Austria.
I only learned here in this forum that the construction industry seems to be different (I have not read a convincing explanation for this yet) and have adjusted our building plans accordingly. At least one of us will be on site every day, sometimes during working hours, sometimes outside of working hours.
If I hadn’t read so much here in the forum, I would have let the construction run as is. I have resisted the basic attitude my whole adult life—that only I do a great job and everyone else must be supervised by me because otherwise nothing works. For the construction, I probably have to lower my expectations of myself. Exactly. People who don’t have the expertise or time to build themselves have no choice but to rely on the work of the companies. A family we’re friends with had a raw attic converted abroad, and the husband only visited the site once during the construction phase; everything else was coordinated via video calls, and it all worked out. As a layperson, you can’t measure everything yourself—this is why there are companies to handle these tasks. Our lives rely on trusting others—doctors, teachers, service providers, and so on.
We knew that not everything would go smoothly—but that SO MUCH would go wrong, including the building height being off by 50cm (20 inches), is extreme. We also didn’t realize that the legal system tends to favor the construction companies or that you can’t really sue based on financial constraints or the duration of the process. Which family can afford to endure a 10-year legal dispute both financially and mentally? The children would be almost grown up by then.
L
Laurasstern19 Feb 2020 23:06I wanted to mention that we have spoken with a company regarding construction supervision/site management during the renovation phase. A flat-rate offer is too complex for everything involved. They are now providing us with an estimate based on expected hours and hourly rates.
The construction supervision would usually involve visiting the site once a week, except at critical points where it might be more frequent. Even then, some issues could possibly go unnoticed.
The construction supervision would usually involve visiting the site once a week, except at critical points where it might be more frequent. Even then, some issues could possibly go unnoticed.
Vicky Pedia19 Feb 2020 23:30Laurasstern schrieb:
Usually, construction supervision takes place once a week on the building site,
except for critical points where it might be more frequent...
some issues might go unnoticed otherwise... Objective construction supervision is definitely very beneficial. You can agree on fixed rates or hourly billing. With fixed rates, there are no unexpected costs!
Vicky Pedia19 Feb 2020 23:36In which region are you building?
Laurasstern schrieb:
Site supervision would typically take place once a week on the construction site. + Preparation + Travel to site + Travel from site + Documentation + Other office work.
All the items listed are reasonable and can be charged. Please keep this in mind when budgeting, so the first invoice doesn’t come as a surprise.
Perhaps a flat fee could be agreed upon for the weekly visits, with everything else billed hourly? This might provide some cost certainty.
Similar topics