Hello,
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?
S
Stadtvilla1929 Apr 2019 19:10This is not meant to be legal advice. But what happens if I buy a BMW and suddenly the engine is no longer available? Do I then have to take an Audi or pay the extra cost for the more expensive engine? There must be some legal basis in contracts for this, right?
It’s not that I want to be stubborn, but why should I be willing to compromise when the company itself is not?
It’s not that I want to be stubborn, but why should I be willing to compromise when the company itself is not?
I see it differently. The cooling system is excellent and very valuable (of course, it’s not air conditioning, but it reduces the temperature by the important 2 to 3 degrees Celsius (4 to 5°F), operates almost cost-free, and is environmentally friendly 🙂).
I would rather choose a different manufacturer.
I would rather choose a different manufacturer.
Similar topics