ᐅ Is a developer required to disclose significant slope height and associated costs?
Created on: 11 Feb 2019 10:52
S
Sony70
Hello dear forum members,
We are currently building our house on the lower part of a slope, on an almost flat plot. In the garden area, there was also a certain incline, so we hired the builder to fill in the ground at a cost of about 3,000 EUR. What we didn’t know, however, was the required building height of the house, which is above the original ground level. Because of this, our garden area had to be filled again, resulting in a slope of 2 meters (6.6 feet) on one side. The costs for reinforcing this slope are estimated between 20,000 and 30,000 EUR. If we had known this earlier, we might have designed the terrace with steps and created a terraced garden. Our builder never informed us about this issue and its consequences. Also, the large slope height is not visible in the construction plans.
Do we have any legal options here?
Thank you in advance!
Sony
We are currently building our house on the lower part of a slope, on an almost flat plot. In the garden area, there was also a certain incline, so we hired the builder to fill in the ground at a cost of about 3,000 EUR. What we didn’t know, however, was the required building height of the house, which is above the original ground level. Because of this, our garden area had to be filled again, resulting in a slope of 2 meters (6.6 feet) on one side. The costs for reinforcing this slope are estimated between 20,000 and 30,000 EUR. If we had known this earlier, we might have designed the terrace with steps and created a terraced garden. Our builder never informed us about this issue and its consequences. Also, the large slope height is not visible in the construction plans.
Do we have any legal options here?
Thank you in advance!
Sony
Mottenhausen schrieb:
Yes, we took that into account, neighbors both about the same height, garage next to garage at the same level, etc. everything fits. Slope towards the street.
But what use is your answer to the original poster now? Right, I overlooked your solution, where exactly is it mentioned again?
To be honest, not much can be fixed afterward with a forgotten 2m (6.5 ft) height difference. Usually, this results in additional financing or a slide leading down to the lower garden (which is only 1.5m (5 ft)).
M
Mottenhausen11 Feb 2019 14:16Zaba12 schrieb:
True, I missed your solution, where was it again? Well... okay. You’re right :-(
H
HilfeHilfe11 Feb 2019 14:27You sometimes visit the site and notice the height differences!
We also had a slope and, to be honest, were quite surprised.
In the end, we built the retaining wall ourselves with a friend. The neighbor provided the topsoil.
Cost was $3,500 doing it yourself instead of $18,000 net from the builder.
We also had a slope and, to be honest, were quite surprised.
In the end, we built the retaining wall ourselves with a friend. The neighbor provided the topsoil.
Cost was $3,500 doing it yourself instead of $18,000 net from the builder.
Sony70 schrieb:
What we didn’t know, however, was the specified building height of the house, which is above the original ground level, so our garden area had to be filled again I don’t quite understand this sentence. Was a terrain already built up that had to be built up even more to reach a ground floor slab height, etc.?
L
Ludwig Werth30 Aug 2019 19:11This project cost 30,000 euros? Hmm… I know of much higher amounts, so the person asking the question actually got off quite cheaply.
I’m surprised that for the past 50 years, homeowners keep making the same mistake: they do not engage an architect and therefore miss out on their advisory and oversight responsibilities. Instead, they buy from a developer, who does not have such duties and who is expected to simply replace all the usual construction professionals required for each project 1:1. As a result, the homeowner does not even have a consultant to review the building contract and all attachments, no plausibility checks are performed, and the project is not professionally managed—only to the extent that it satisfies the interests and agreed construction services of the developer. The homeowner does not even have a health and safety coordinator and will be surprised if they are held criminally liable following an accident and the insurance fund seeks recourse for the accident costs (for example, a broken femur costs 80,000 euros). The homeowner also does not care whether the plot is free of unexploded ordnance (which might trigger a fee of 70 euros), and as a result, there are often unexploded bombs beneath newly built houses. The list of what homeowners waive could go on. The catch is that all these waived items carry risks, and if those risks materialize, the costs can become exorbitantly high.
I’m surprised that for the past 50 years, homeowners keep making the same mistake: they do not engage an architect and therefore miss out on their advisory and oversight responsibilities. Instead, they buy from a developer, who does not have such duties and who is expected to simply replace all the usual construction professionals required for each project 1:1. As a result, the homeowner does not even have a consultant to review the building contract and all attachments, no plausibility checks are performed, and the project is not professionally managed—only to the extent that it satisfies the interests and agreed construction services of the developer. The homeowner does not even have a health and safety coordinator and will be surprised if they are held criminally liable following an accident and the insurance fund seeks recourse for the accident costs (for example, a broken femur costs 80,000 euros). The homeowner also does not care whether the plot is free of unexploded ordnance (which might trigger a fee of 70 euros), and as a result, there are often unexploded bombs beneath newly built houses. The list of what homeowners waive could go on. The catch is that all these waived items carry risks, and if those risks materialize, the costs can become exorbitantly high.
Ludwig Werth schrieb:
This project cost 30,000 euros? Hm... I know of completely different amounts, so the questioner actually got off fairly cheap.
I am surprised that for 50 years, builders keep making the same mistake: they do not hire an architect and therefore miss out on the architect’s advisory and duty-to-inform services. Instead, they buy from a developer who has no such obligations and rely on the developer to fully replace all the usual construction professionals required for each project. As a result, the builder doesn’t even have an advisor to review the construction contract and all its attachments, no plausibility checks are performed, and the project is not professionally initiated—only to the extent that it serves the interests and agreed construction services of the developer. The builder does not even have a site safety coordinator (SiGeKo) and will be surprised if they are held criminally liable following an accident and the workers’ compensation board seeks recourse for accident costs (for example, a fractured femoral neck costs 80,000 euros). The builder is also indifferent about whether the site is free of unexploded ordnance (which could trigger a fee of 70 euros), which is why there are often bombs from World War II buried beneath newly built houses. The list could go on about what the builder neglects. The issue is that all these omissions involve risks, and when those risks materialize, the consequences can be extremely costly. That’s quite a lot of assumptions in such a short comment—without knowing the details... is it really worth attacking an old post like this?