Hello,
my question concerns a situation with our general contractor:
We visited the construction site to check on the progress.
A subcontractor working for the general contractor asked us whether the chimney (which we had installed ourselves as a special request) should be fitted with corner beads and plastered. We agreed to this on site. Normally, with special requests, the general contractor provides a quote, so the buyer receives a cost estimate and can then decide whether to proceed. Instead of a quote, the subcontractor had already completed all the work, and the general contractor charged us at a price we would never have accepted and, if necessary, would have carried out ourselves or commissioned separately after completion.
What can be done in this situation? Does the general contractor have the right to refer to the fact that we gave the order on site and therefore no prior quote was required?
Thank you in advance!
my question concerns a situation with our general contractor:
We visited the construction site to check on the progress.
A subcontractor working for the general contractor asked us whether the chimney (which we had installed ourselves as a special request) should be fitted with corner beads and plastered. We agreed to this on site. Normally, with special requests, the general contractor provides a quote, so the buyer receives a cost estimate and can then decide whether to proceed. Instead of a quote, the subcontractor had already completed all the work, and the general contractor charged us at a price we would never have accepted and, if necessary, would have carried out ourselves or commissioned separately after completion.
What can be done in this situation? Does the general contractor have the right to refer to the fact that we gave the order on site and therefore no prior quote was required?
Thank you in advance!
Zauberwesen9 Feb 2020 12:33Joedreck schrieb:
I'm not seeking legal advice, just curious. I only have basic knowledge of civil law and an opinion on it, but certainly not a comprehensive one.
Besides, the term "jurist" is not protected. I could call myself that too. Of course you can call yourself that. I could also call myself an "economist" or "home builder" (though I haven’t built a house yet) – everyone can choose as they like.
Regarding the matter at hand, I have explained my perspective in 2-3 posts. You are welcome to have a different "opinion," but in my view, the original posters should not be presented with opinions as "the correct ones" if they are legally incorrect or not as clear as stated.
I only referred to one opinion, not another. For me, it would have just been interesting to have it confirmed or disproved. Nothing more, nothing less. Since I don’t have solid expertise, I also don’t share my opinion here. I leave that to others.
It’s a pity that you don’t provide any concrete information about your profession. Otherwise, it remains speculation whether your opinion can be trusted.
It’s a pity that you don’t provide any concrete information about your profession. Otherwise, it remains speculation whether your opinion can be trusted.
Zauberwesen9 Feb 2020 17:01Aero has already put it quite accurately – but that doesn’t mean you should rely solely on my opinion (see above – three lawyers = four opinions)