Hello,
we are building a single-family house on a slight slope with a basement living area. Our shell contractor traditionally cast the walls with formwork and planned to embed the 100mm (4 inches) Styrofoam insulation directly and pour waterproof concrete over it. However, my building expert intervened and explained that this would not provide proper moisture protection, as the insulation (including wall protection and dimpled membrane) cannot be considered a water-repellent layer. Furthermore, this method does not comply with the relevant DIN standard.
So, the Styrofoam was removed from the formwork, the basement was poured, a bituminous waterproofing membrane (KMB) was applied, and the insulation boards were installed.
However, now we are being charged separately for the bituminous waterproofing (around €2000). Is this legitimate?
The construction specifications do not mention any coating, but it is common practice to do it this way—does this really have to be paid for separately?
we are building a single-family house on a slight slope with a basement living area. Our shell contractor traditionally cast the walls with formwork and planned to embed the 100mm (4 inches) Styrofoam insulation directly and pour waterproof concrete over it. However, my building expert intervened and explained that this would not provide proper moisture protection, as the insulation (including wall protection and dimpled membrane) cannot be considered a water-repellent layer. Furthermore, this method does not comply with the relevant DIN standard.
So, the Styrofoam was removed from the formwork, the basement was poured, a bituminous waterproofing membrane (KMB) was applied, and the insulation boards were installed.
However, now we are being charged separately for the bituminous waterproofing (around €2000). Is this legitimate?
The construction specifications do not mention any coating, but it is common practice to do it this way—does this really have to be paid for separately?
B
Bauexperte24 Mar 2015 13:37Hello,
how does the saying go correctly: on the high seas and in court .....
To answer that reliably, I would actually need to know the entire construction description/your contract. On the other hand, it is already enough that you did not find any clause in the construction description or possible additional agreements stating "built according to the current state of technology."
The approach of your provider suggests that he probably offers in the lower price segment of his category; therefore, he wants to complete two steps at once. Regardless of the fact that you should be glad that your expert objected, this does not belong to the service owed by your provider; DIN standard or not. As the client, you have read the construction description and agreed to it by signing – you could have had it checked, complained, or requested samples early on. It cannot be that you want to build cheaply on the one hand and on the other expect construction-related corrections to be provided free of charge afterward. Unfortunately, that worked for quite a few years, but today judges see this no longer so one-sidedly.
2000€ is of course a lot, but it also covers the additional work steps that would not have been necessary if construction had been possible according to the construction description. Maybe you should have your expert – based on this experience – take another look at the construction description and the contract documents, if that has not been done yet.
Regards, Bauexperte
how does the saying go correctly: on the high seas and in court .....
Häusler schrieb:
Only: now this KMB is being charged to us as a separate item (about 2000€). Is this legal? Although the construction description does not mention any coating, it is common practice that this is done – does it really have to be paid for separately?
To answer that reliably, I would actually need to know the entire construction description/your contract. On the other hand, it is already enough that you did not find any clause in the construction description or possible additional agreements stating "built according to the current state of technology."
The approach of your provider suggests that he probably offers in the lower price segment of his category; therefore, he wants to complete two steps at once. Regardless of the fact that you should be glad that your expert objected, this does not belong to the service owed by your provider; DIN standard or not. As the client, you have read the construction description and agreed to it by signing – you could have had it checked, complained, or requested samples early on. It cannot be that you want to build cheaply on the one hand and on the other expect construction-related corrections to be provided free of charge afterward. Unfortunately, that worked for quite a few years, but today judges see this no longer so one-sidedly.
2000€ is of course a lot, but it also covers the additional work steps that would not have been necessary if construction had been possible according to the construction description. Maybe you should have your expert – based on this experience – take another look at the construction description and the contract documents, if that has not been done yet.
Regards, Bauexperte
S
Sebastian7925 Mar 2015 21:02I find it much more concerning that the structural builder wanted to pour in the insulation – what is he thinking???
Make sure that only experts check any other critical points!
Make sure that only experts check any other critical points!
Similar topics