S
Stadtvilla1929 Apr 2019 11:47Hello,
I have a basic question regarding the legal side of things—maybe someone has some knowledge about this.
We are building a kit house: we will receive the shell from the house company and all the building services from a partner company. Last year, we signed a contract for a Viessmann heat pump, photovoltaic system with battery, and ventilation. We want to join the Viessmann community, which requires having three devices. Since we have a geothermal heat pump, it’s quite easy to use it for cooling the house as well. The additional component is integrated into the heat pump and costs about 1000€ (approximately 1100 USD) extra, and this part is exactly what the issue is about.
Our building services technician recently told us that since April 1st (01.04), Viessmann suddenly and without prior notice has changed its devices. That extra component can no longer be integrated into the heat pump for 1000€ (about 1100 USD), but is only available as an external unit for 3000€ (about 3300 USD) extra. Our technician then said that Waterkotte is the only manufacturer that still integrates that component into the heat pump at a fair price. At first, this didn’t bother me. He said he would install a Waterkotte heat pump for us, and we would still have three devices—ventilation, battery, photovoltaic system—to join the Viessmann community.
At home, however, I started thinking differently. First, I was told that Waterkotte has very poor service, which is why the company switched to Viessmann a few years ago. Second, all Viessmann devices are supposed to communicate with each other. So, I could control ventilation and heating from a single device without needing to adjust settings on two separate units.
Anyway, to make a long story short: What is the legal situation here? I signed a contract for a Viessmann heat pump with cooling, but that product no longer exists as such. If I want to stick with Viessmann, do I have to pay the 2000€ (about 2200 USD) difference myself, or is that the responsibility of the building services company?
I have a basic question regarding the legal side of things—maybe someone has some knowledge about this.
We are building a kit house: we will receive the shell from the house company and all the building services from a partner company. Last year, we signed a contract for a Viessmann heat pump, photovoltaic system with battery, and ventilation. We want to join the Viessmann community, which requires having three devices. Since we have a geothermal heat pump, it’s quite easy to use it for cooling the house as well. The additional component is integrated into the heat pump and costs about 1000€ (approximately 1100 USD) extra, and this part is exactly what the issue is about.
Our building services technician recently told us that since April 1st (01.04), Viessmann suddenly and without prior notice has changed its devices. That extra component can no longer be integrated into the heat pump for 1000€ (about 1100 USD), but is only available as an external unit for 3000€ (about 3300 USD) extra. Our technician then said that Waterkotte is the only manufacturer that still integrates that component into the heat pump at a fair price. At first, this didn’t bother me. He said he would install a Waterkotte heat pump for us, and we would still have three devices—ventilation, battery, photovoltaic system—to join the Viessmann community.
At home, however, I started thinking differently. First, I was told that Waterkotte has very poor service, which is why the company switched to Viessmann a few years ago. Second, all Viessmann devices are supposed to communicate with each other. So, I could control ventilation and heating from a single device without needing to adjust settings on two separate units.
Anyway, to make a long story short: What is the legal situation here? I signed a contract for a Viessmann heat pump with cooling, but that product no longer exists as such. If I want to stick with Viessmann, do I have to pay the 2000€ (about 2200 USD) difference myself, or is that the responsibility of the building services company?
It depends on how the contract is worded. For example, if it mentions comparable equipment, you’re at a disadvantage. So first, read it carefully. Then initiate a discussion and document everything in writing. Depending on the outcome, you’ll need to decide how to proceed. What exactly does it say? Usually, it ends up being a cost-sharing arrangement anyway.
S
Stadtvilla1929 Apr 2019 12:09The contract explicitly concerns this one device from Viessmann. There are no general terms and conditions included.
We don’t necessarily need the cooling... but I’m also a bit stubborn with the company. We also signed the offer for the electrical work there, but now we want to do about 80% of it ourselves since my cousin is an electrician. This was rejected because we signed a contract, and if we don’t comply, we are supposed to pay a penalty. So I’m not willing to make many concessions to the company.
The question now is that the company must deliver what is stated in the contract. However, they cannot because Viessmann has discontinued the product line. Who will cover the additional effort now?
If it were up to me, I would say no cooling, but then I want a €2,000 (about $2,200) discount or I should be allowed to withdraw from the electrical contract without any costs. I’d rather not run to a lawyer and get legal advice. We hardly have any time and no money anyway :p
Maybe someone here who knows about contracts and stuff can help…
We don’t necessarily need the cooling... but I’m also a bit stubborn with the company. We also signed the offer for the electrical work there, but now we want to do about 80% of it ourselves since my cousin is an electrician. This was rejected because we signed a contract, and if we don’t comply, we are supposed to pay a penalty. So I’m not willing to make many concessions to the company.
The question now is that the company must deliver what is stated in the contract. However, they cannot because Viessmann has discontinued the product line. Who will cover the additional effort now?
If it were up to me, I would say no cooling, but then I want a €2,000 (about $2,200) discount or I should be allowed to withdraw from the electrical contract without any costs. I’d rather not run to a lawyer and get legal advice. We hardly have any time and no money anyway :p
Maybe someone here who knows about contracts and stuff can help…
S
Stadtvilla1929 Apr 2019 12:33I believe this is correct. He said he has 30 customers to explain this to now and is apparently in contact with his Viessmann representative to find a solution.
It is the Viessmann Vitocal 333 G.
This is supposed to be very recent, as of 01.04.
It is the Viessmann Vitocal 333 G.
This is supposed to be very recent, as of 01.04.
Similar topics