Dear Forum,
We are currently building a house through a construction company. The building specifications state there will be 4 sockets per room. Since this is not sufficient for us, we have chosen to add extra sockets in some places. Price according to the electrician: 90€ for a single socket, 120€ for a double socket.
I would like to explain our issue using the following example:
For one room, we selected
- 1x single socket
- 3x double sockets
According to our understanding, we should pay the extra cost compared to the building specification as follows:
3x surcharge from single to double socket = 3x(120€ - 90€) = 90€.
However, the electrician calculates the cost as follows:
- 2x double sockets cover the 4 sockets per room specified in the building description
- in addition, extra costs apply for 1x double socket + 1x single socket = 120€ + 90€ = 210€.
=> The electrician is charging more than twice what we expected—solely due to a different calculation method.
My question to the forum is:
Is the electrician using a common calculation method, or is this a case of overcharging?
We are currently building a house through a construction company. The building specifications state there will be 4 sockets per room. Since this is not sufficient for us, we have chosen to add extra sockets in some places. Price according to the electrician: 90€ for a single socket, 120€ for a double socket.
I would like to explain our issue using the following example:
For one room, we selected
- 1x single socket
- 3x double sockets
According to our understanding, we should pay the extra cost compared to the building specification as follows:
3x surcharge from single to double socket = 3x(120€ - 90€) = 90€.
However, the electrician calculates the cost as follows:
- 2x double sockets cover the 4 sockets per room specified in the building description
- in addition, extra costs apply for 1x double socket + 1x single socket = 120€ + 90€ = 210€.
=> The electrician is charging more than twice what we expected—solely due to a different calculation method.
My question to the forum is:
Is the electrician using a common calculation method, or is this a case of overcharging?
I believe the calculation method is incorrect. As mentioned before, a single-gang box is more expensive because it requires running a cable that needs to be connected to a circuit breaker. For a multi-gang box, the effort only includes the installation of a flush-mounted box plus frame and cover plate.
M4rvin schrieb:
I think the calculation method is incorrect. As I already mentioned, a single gang box is more expensive because a cable needs to be installed, which must be connected to a circuit breaker. For a multiple gang box, only the effort for the flush-mount box, frame, and cover is involved.Have you ever heard of flat-rate calculation? It is certainly used somewhere in “your” company as well, otherwise you wouldn’t get a salary. When I give my clients a CD, it doesn’t cost just one euro, but 59€, or the CD is already included in a contract price of 199€. Nobody can tell me “it’s just the push of a button.”
H
HilfeHilfe17 Sep 2019 09:19Come on, people. Craftsmen don’t work for free. Why should a tradesperson always offer the cheapest and best price for the customer? The customer is usually just a “one-time thing.”
There was a contract, and the service will be delivered as agreed. If the customer wants something extra, it will cost more.
It’s the same with cars – adding extras afterwards is always more expensive.
There was a contract, and the service will be delivered as agreed. If the customer wants something extra, it will cost more.
It’s the same with cars – adding extras afterwards is always more expensive.
B
boxandroof17 Sep 2019 10:16The electrician suddenly comes up with a "calculation method" that the original poster couldn’t have anticipated. Honestly, I’m surprised by the reactions here. It might be that the electrician gets away with it, but I don’t think it’s right.
The electrician’s cross-subsidization can already work out because they charge €90 or €120 (approximately $100 or $135) for the outlets. That’s not a small amount, it was known in advance, and therefore completely legitimate. If that’s not enough, then they simply have to ask for €200 (about $225). If the original poster only goes for the house’s basic setup, the electrician’s cross-subsidization no longer adds up.
The electrician’s cross-subsidization can already work out because they charge €90 or €120 (approximately $100 or $135) for the outlets. That’s not a small amount, it was known in advance, and therefore completely legitimate. If that’s not enough, then they simply have to ask for €200 (about $225). If the original poster only goes for the house’s basic setup, the electrician’s cross-subsidization no longer adds up.
H
hampshire17 Sep 2019 10:30Any change creates logistical and bureaucratic effort. Most homeowners do not see this. However, the costs are real. That is why changes are more expensive than just the additional material and labor costs.
“Detail-obsessed penny-pinchers” without commercial understanding are difficult to deal with.
“Detail-obsessed penny-pinchers” without commercial understanding are difficult to deal with.
M4rvin schrieb:
As mentioned before, a single socket box is more expensive because a cable has to be installed, which needs to be connected to a circuit breaker. Does your building specification even allow for this? It is rather unusual for each outlet to be individually protected. This is typically done in the kitchen with individual circuits for the stove, microwave, refrigerator, etc., or for the washer and dryer, but not in children's rooms, bedrooms, or offices.
Therefore, the additional effort ultimately depends mainly on how the "4 outlets per room" is interpreted. If you can install one outlet in each corner of the room as standard, the extra cost for making it a double or triple outlet should be quite reasonable. However, if the (resourceful) electrician interprets it as "4 outlets together under the light switch," this will naturally require more meters of cable and wall chasing, which would justify a noticeable surcharge.
You should clarify this!
Similar topics