… building affordably.
I have been following this forum for a while. I am surprised that architects in Germany apparently have managed to keep their privileges. What do I mean by that?
Architects’ fees are calculated based on the "fee-eligible" construction costs. So, an architect primarily has an interest in building expensively, doesn’t he?
Years or decades ago, this system was also common in Switzerland. During periods of significant construction cost increases, the payment system for architects was revised. Today, no one in Switzerland pays an architect based on construction costs. Never.
I am not questioning the (justified) income of architects. It just seems outdated and questionable to define fees based on "construction costs" or "contract values": An architect should be compensated for their effort. If a wall costs twice as much, the architect definitely does not have twice the workload!
The legal situation in Germany is apparently clear. Even if billing is done retrospectively according to HOAI (the official fee structure for architects and engineers), the courts support this (viewing it differently than as "circumvention").
Or am I wrong? Am I on the wrong track?
I have been following this forum for a while. I am surprised that architects in Germany apparently have managed to keep their privileges. What do I mean by that?
Architects’ fees are calculated based on the "fee-eligible" construction costs. So, an architect primarily has an interest in building expensively, doesn’t he?
Years or decades ago, this system was also common in Switzerland. During periods of significant construction cost increases, the payment system for architects was revised. Today, no one in Switzerland pays an architect based on construction costs. Never.
I am not questioning the (justified) income of architects. It just seems outdated and questionable to define fees based on "construction costs" or "contract values": An architect should be compensated for their effort. If a wall costs twice as much, the architect definitely does not have twice the workload!
The legal situation in Germany is apparently clear. Even if billing is done retrospectively according to HOAI (the official fee structure for architects and engineers), the courts support this (viewing it differently than as "circumvention").
Or am I wrong? Am I on the wrong track?
Milo3 schrieb:
So: our architect charges according to HOAI, BUT he uses a lower construction cost base and told me that he has to charge based on this amount; otherwise, it wouldn’t be profitable for him. Our house is estimated to be ready for occupancy at 560k, but he charges based on 300k.That doesn’t really make sense... “It’s not worth it for me to charge you 50k€, so I’ll only charge you 30k€...”montessalet schrieb:
That I’m not so sure about: as far as I know, an architect can still charge retroactively according to HOAI – regardless of whether a flat fee was agreed upon. Whether they actually do is another question….. (no plaintiff, no judge).No, HOAI applies "unless otherwise agreed." It is only legally binding for public sector clients.
There are differing opinions regarding the mandatory application of the HOAI, and even legal experts do not all agree on this matter. If fixed fees were considered inadmissible or unethical—and therefore invalid—meaning that even the principle of "good faith" would not apply, I would view it as fraud if an architect offered them with the intention of demanding additional payment later. On the other hand, I do recognize a valid reason for a fee schedule for professions with particular liability risks, as these risks remain equally serious even if the professional “works for half price.”
However, such a fee schedule becomes rather detached from reality if a young architect must choose between earning their living through qualified work—albeit at market-based rates—or “alternatively” driving a taxi at night or keeping a student job as a waiter, because no client is willing to pay the fee schedule price (and would rather settle for the general contractor’s low-cost helper).
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
However, such a fee schedule becomes rather detached from reality if a young architect must choose between earning their living through qualified work—albeit at market-based rates—or “alternatively” driving a taxi at night or keeping a student job as a waiter, because no client is willing to pay the fee schedule price (and would rather settle for the general contractor’s low-cost helper).
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
montessalet27 Feb 2019 04:39The entirety of the statements reinforces my opinion that the billing guidelines regulated by HOAI (e.g., based on construction costs) represent a one-sided and favoring method today.
An architect should receive a fair fee (taking into account their risks). However, construction costs as a basis are inadequate: the architect’s efforts and services should serve as the foundation.
@Fuchur: Share your opinion that HOAI regulations (minimum and maximum rates) cannot be overridden.
An architect should receive a fair fee (taking into account their risks). However, construction costs as a basis are inadequate: the architect’s efforts and services should serve as the foundation.
@Fuchur: Share your opinion that HOAI regulations (minimum and maximum rates) cannot be overridden.
That’s nonsense—one person claims something false, another believes it, and suddenly it’s “fake news.”
If an architect offers a private client a design for €10,000 (approximately $11,000) then that is allowed, even if the HOAI (official scale of fees) sets €20,000 (approximately $22,000) as the minimum fee. (End of story!) The HOAI applies only when no fee agreement has been made. For example, if you go to an architect, explain what you want, and they create plans without a fee agreement, they can charge according to the HOAI.
It’s also incorrect to argue that the HOAI unfairly favors one side. The price tables weren’t arbitrarily created. The HOAI will be abolished soon anyway due to EU regulations. In countries where this has already happened, you see prices for design services initially drop, then some offices go out of business, and eventually prices stabilize above the equivalent of the HOAI fees.
If an architect offers a private client a design for €10,000 (approximately $11,000) then that is allowed, even if the HOAI (official scale of fees) sets €20,000 (approximately $22,000) as the minimum fee. (End of story!) The HOAI applies only when no fee agreement has been made. For example, if you go to an architect, explain what you want, and they create plans without a fee agreement, they can charge according to the HOAI.
It’s also incorrect to argue that the HOAI unfairly favors one side. The price tables weren’t arbitrarily created. The HOAI will be abolished soon anyway due to EU regulations. In countries where this has already happened, you see prices for design services initially drop, then some offices go out of business, and eventually prices stabilize above the equivalent of the HOAI fees.
H
hampshire27 Feb 2019 10:12Fuchur schrieb:
Even with different agreements, the minimum and maximum rates cannot be overridden. What does this specifically mean for a homeowner who has agreed on a flat fee with the architect?
Similar topics