ᐅ Exterior walls built with a deviation of approximately 4 cm from vertical alignment
Created on: 11 Mar 2017 20:51
S
Sparstrumpf
Hello forum community,
we are currently quite unsettled regarding our construction. Our shell builder has constructed an exterior wall with a slope of about 4cm (1.6 inches) from bottom to top. According to the site manager, this should not affect the structural integrity, but now the plasterer has to compensate for this error at the shell builder's expense. Since we are not experts, our question is whether this is actually acceptable and how the plasterer would correct this issue. Obviously, it means applying more plaster, but does the plasterer need to use any additional materials or tools to compensate?
we are currently quite unsettled regarding our construction. Our shell builder has constructed an exterior wall with a slope of about 4cm (1.6 inches) from bottom to top. According to the site manager, this should not affect the structural integrity, but now the plasterer has to compensate for this error at the shell builder's expense. Since we are not experts, our question is whether this is actually acceptable and how the plasterer would correct this issue. Obviously, it means applying more plaster, but does the plasterer need to use any additional materials or tools to compensate?
S
Sparstrumpf15 Mar 2017 20:2011ant schrieb:
Lawyers are not people who ruin others. The point is to avoid causing additional costs by letting other contractors continue under the mistaken belief that the previous work trades provided a sound foundation. Pulling the emergency brake too late can be expensive.
Involving a lawyer does not escalate the situation, not even atmospherically—they don’t even have to appear in person, only advise on drafting the formal notice. This is a formality so the client can say: I have given timely notice that, in my opinion, there is a defect. That’s all—no one is harmed.
P.S.: Our writing times probably crossed paths just now...
So, are you saying your house was basically built 4 cm (1.6 inches) into the neighbor’s property (or vice versa)? The other way around, so towards me.
For now, we do feel somewhat more comfortable with the situation again.
11ant schrieb:
Lawyers are not people who cause delays. The point is precisely to avoid incurring costs by letting other contractors continue their work under the false assumption that the previous trades have provided a solid foundation. Pulling the emergency brake too late can become expensive. There is absolutely no need to involve a lawyer before having a proper conversation with the construction company. When you identify an issue and talk to the site manager, they will usually try to downplay it at first. That is not a constructive discussion; both parties need time to prepare.
That has happened here as well, and the wall will be rebuilt—completely without a lawyer or any threats.
Payday schrieb:
there is absolutely no need to involve a lawyer [...] completely without a lawyer or any threat.Even though some people like to “threaten” with their lawyer: a lawyer in itself is not a threat, but simply a legal advisor. The law applies to everyone, including laypersons, and exercising legal rights may require following formal procedures (which means a layperson can inadvertently lose their legal position if they do not seek advice). Therefore, legal counsel can be useful even in seemingly minor cases. When a lawyer only advises the client and does not engage directly with the contractor, it cannot be considered “involving” a lawyer. A good lawyer understands that some people react negatively to lawyers and will often advise their client to communicate the agreed messages in their own name.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
Therefore, legal advice can also be useful in cases that seem minor.I can also CC Mr. Schäuble on my tax return. The question is whether that is really necessary.
Payday is just trying to show that it’s possible to have a normal conversation first before involving a lawyer. Whether the lawyer actually gets involved or not, the bill still comes, so why go through all that if you can reach an agreement that way.
B
Bieber081516 Mar 2017 20:37Alex85 schrieb:
Payday is just trying to point out that it’s possible to have a “normal” conversation first before involving a lawyer. I believe everyone here agrees with that. However, if someone posts here in the forum saying the site manager says “everything’s fine,” the advice must be to formally report the defect. Mistakes in procedure can happen—I would even say the layperson will make procedural errors (and in the end, if things get serious, end up empty-handed). Therefore: get proper advice and do it correctly!
By the way, the “other side” is always better prepared and usually has already consulted legal advice multiple times, for example when drafting the general terms and conditions.
Alex85 schrieb:
What’s the point if everyone can just agree without that. The starting point of this thread was disagreement. If everyone agrees, then you still have to hope that this agreement does not unreasonably disadvantage the client. If everything is fine, of course you don’t need a lawyer, nor an independent construction supervisor.
What kind of formal errors are actually being discussed here? Can someone please explain?
The lawyer charges 200 euros for the initial consultation. If you always go to a lawyer immediately before any discussion has taken place, that’s a lot of money wasted.
If the original poster had listened to you and immediately run to a lawyer out of panic, they would have thrown money out the window.
Is everything only black and white for you?
The lawyer charges 200 euros for the initial consultation. If you always go to a lawyer immediately before any discussion has taken place, that’s a lot of money wasted.
If the original poster had listened to you and immediately run to a lawyer out of panic, they would have thrown money out the window.
Is everything only black and white for you?
Similar topics