P
PearlJam197610 Jun 2013 12:55Hello dear experts in the forum!
We are currently having a townhouse built by a developer.
The interior walls have already been plastered. The installation of the underfloor heating and the heating and sanitary fixtures will take place soon. After that, the screed will be applied.
Regarding the electrical installation:
The developer’s standard was, of course, once again close to the minimum equipment according to DIN or RAL 1* standards.
For this reason, we had to pay an additional charge of nearly 8,000 EUR for various extra sockets, network cabling, and an 8-participant satellite system (5 in use).
The building contract between the developer and the electrical company clearly specified installation with conduit. Even when commissioning our special requests, formulations were used such as the satellite system from the attic down to the basement in conduit.
In retrospect, the electrical company found that they had not installed the system or had not done so continuously in conduit. They justified their approach with the “local usual installation practice” and claimed that even with conduit, pulling cables afterward would no longer be possible (for sheathed cables).
This is apparent as follows (please also take a look at the pictures – link provided below):
Installations on the concrete floor or in the concrete ceiling are in conduit up to or just before the brick walls. After that, the sheathed cable continues under the plaster up to the boxes.
The Cat7 and coaxial cables were correctly laid up to the boxes. However, the cables then lie partially exposed (without conduit) in the riser to the basement, which was later bricked up and filled (no shaft!).
All walls have already been plastered. The riser is bricked up on each floor, and the respective recesses in the concrete floors have been concreted closed.
According to the companies involved, reopening the riser is no longer possible because the risk of damaging the gas, water, and electrical lines is too high.
Initially, we were offered a compensation amount of a mere 300 EUR for this major overall defect.
I am now at the point with the developer and electrical company that, retroactively and free of charge to me, the following will be done:
Next to the original riser, a small shaft will be built in which a total of 5 empty conduits will be run as reserves to various rooms and the attic.
The shaft will be visually adapted and plastered to blend with the existing conditions. The empty conduits will then be routed over the unfinished floor to a location of my choice and later cut flush with the screed.
This solution is intended to compensate for the lack of replaceability of the Cat and coaxial cables.
Additionally, the warranty for the riser cables under VOB regulations will be extended from 5 to 10 years.
The compensation amount has been increased from 300 EUR to 600 EUR.
We are now willing to proceed with the shaft and empty conduits (reserves). We can also consider the extension of the warranty.
However, the amount of the compensation payment is not understandable or acceptable to us.
We believe that there is a significant difference between the installed system and the planned system (completely in conduit).
From our point of view, the following losses must be permanently accepted by us and cannot be corrected on site:
- Disadvantage compared to the other townhouse owners. In their cases, the installations were either modified afterward or implemented from the start, partly beyond standard (in conduit with individual conductors).
- It is not possible to pull any cables afterward, as even cables laid in conduit up to the boxes are embedded in the riser without conduit. Costs, time, and material effort for future repairs or retrofits are significantly higher than in the other houses.
- Due to missing conduits and boxes in cast-in-place concrete walls during the shell construction phase (I have the construction plans), installations are now located in places that we originally did not intend or plan.
- Due to partly sloppy installation and deviations from usual installation zones, there is a risk of damaging cables in the future.
- Repairs in the riser (including gas and water) will only be possible with great caution in the future because electrical cables were attached with cable ties on and between the water/heating pipes.
We would like to hear your opinion on this matter.
In particular, we are interested in your assessment of a realistic compensation amount.
We would also appreciate your general opinion on the quality of the installation.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and advice!
Best regards,
PearlJam1976
We are currently having a townhouse built by a developer.
The interior walls have already been plastered. The installation of the underfloor heating and the heating and sanitary fixtures will take place soon. After that, the screed will be applied.
Regarding the electrical installation:
The developer’s standard was, of course, once again close to the minimum equipment according to DIN or RAL 1* standards.
For this reason, we had to pay an additional charge of nearly 8,000 EUR for various extra sockets, network cabling, and an 8-participant satellite system (5 in use).
The building contract between the developer and the electrical company clearly specified installation with conduit. Even when commissioning our special requests, formulations were used such as the satellite system from the attic down to the basement in conduit.
In retrospect, the electrical company found that they had not installed the system or had not done so continuously in conduit. They justified their approach with the “local usual installation practice” and claimed that even with conduit, pulling cables afterward would no longer be possible (for sheathed cables).
This is apparent as follows (please also take a look at the pictures – link provided below):
Installations on the concrete floor or in the concrete ceiling are in conduit up to or just before the brick walls. After that, the sheathed cable continues under the plaster up to the boxes.
The Cat7 and coaxial cables were correctly laid up to the boxes. However, the cables then lie partially exposed (without conduit) in the riser to the basement, which was later bricked up and filled (no shaft!).
All walls have already been plastered. The riser is bricked up on each floor, and the respective recesses in the concrete floors have been concreted closed.
According to the companies involved, reopening the riser is no longer possible because the risk of damaging the gas, water, and electrical lines is too high.
Initially, we were offered a compensation amount of a mere 300 EUR for this major overall defect.
I am now at the point with the developer and electrical company that, retroactively and free of charge to me, the following will be done:
Next to the original riser, a small shaft will be built in which a total of 5 empty conduits will be run as reserves to various rooms and the attic.
The shaft will be visually adapted and plastered to blend with the existing conditions. The empty conduits will then be routed over the unfinished floor to a location of my choice and later cut flush with the screed.
This solution is intended to compensate for the lack of replaceability of the Cat and coaxial cables.
Additionally, the warranty for the riser cables under VOB regulations will be extended from 5 to 10 years.
The compensation amount has been increased from 300 EUR to 600 EUR.
We are now willing to proceed with the shaft and empty conduits (reserves). We can also consider the extension of the warranty.
However, the amount of the compensation payment is not understandable or acceptable to us.
We believe that there is a significant difference between the installed system and the planned system (completely in conduit).
From our point of view, the following losses must be permanently accepted by us and cannot be corrected on site:
- Disadvantage compared to the other townhouse owners. In their cases, the installations were either modified afterward or implemented from the start, partly beyond standard (in conduit with individual conductors).
- It is not possible to pull any cables afterward, as even cables laid in conduit up to the boxes are embedded in the riser without conduit. Costs, time, and material effort for future repairs or retrofits are significantly higher than in the other houses.
- Due to missing conduits and boxes in cast-in-place concrete walls during the shell construction phase (I have the construction plans), installations are now located in places that we originally did not intend or plan.
- Due to partly sloppy installation and deviations from usual installation zones, there is a risk of damaging cables in the future.
- Repairs in the riser (including gas and water) will only be possible with great caution in the future because electrical cables were attached with cable ties on and between the water/heating pipes.
We would like to hear your opinion on this matter.
In particular, we are interested in your assessment of a realistic compensation amount.
We would also appreciate your general opinion on the quality of the installation.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and advice!
Best regards,
PearlJam1976
P
PearlJam197613 Jun 2013 07:41Hello!
No one has an opinion?
Regards
PJ1976
No one has an opinion?
Regards
PJ1976
B
Bauexperte13 Jun 2013 12:38Hello,
I really like Eddie Vedder’s voice 😉
You signed a contract for work, which surely includes references to the building code/planning permission regulations (Baugesetzbuch/VOB) and procedures to follow in case of defects. The problem is that getting a legal ruling in your favor is difficult because "justice" from the homeowner’s perspective and "justice" from the contractor’s perspective are usually very different things. Judges rarely have the time or inclination to deal with such relatively minor disputes (claims in the range of a few thousand euros/dollars/pounds), and they usually recommend a settlement. Even regional courts (with claims starting around 10,000 euros/dollars/pounds) tend to lean towards settlements. The consequence of this is that even if you manage to secure a larger compensation, your lawyer will charge you twice (once for each side of the process), you will have to pay a share of the costs for the court-appointed expert (who may be brought in during the trial), and the court fees will be split proportionally according to the disputed sum. In the end, the amount you receive after legal fees and costs may be less than if you had settled with your contractor from the start.
Regards, Bauexperte
I really like Eddie Vedder’s voice 😉
PearlJam1976 schrieb:Unfortunately, there isn’t much to assess here. In my opinion, you have only two options: either you reach an agreement with your contractor, accepting a credit that might be less than the actual defect warrants, or you bring in a specialist expert in electrical work and take the matter to court. If you choose the latter, be aware that this will likely be a lengthy process and, as is often the case, you may end up throwing good money after bad 🙁
We would like to hear your opinion on this topic.
In particular, we are interested in your assessment of a realistic compensation.
You signed a contract for work, which surely includes references to the building code/planning permission regulations (Baugesetzbuch/VOB) and procedures to follow in case of defects. The problem is that getting a legal ruling in your favor is difficult because "justice" from the homeowner’s perspective and "justice" from the contractor’s perspective are usually very different things. Judges rarely have the time or inclination to deal with such relatively minor disputes (claims in the range of a few thousand euros/dollars/pounds), and they usually recommend a settlement. Even regional courts (with claims starting around 10,000 euros/dollars/pounds) tend to lean towards settlements. The consequence of this is that even if you manage to secure a larger compensation, your lawyer will charge you twice (once for each side of the process), you will have to pay a share of the costs for the court-appointed expert (who may be brought in during the trial), and the court fees will be split proportionally according to the disputed sum. In the end, the amount you receive after legal fees and costs may be less than if you had settled with your contractor from the start.
Regards, Bauexperte
P
PearlJam197613 Jun 2013 12:53I also believe that the most indisputable thing in the whole matter is Eddie's voice 😀
Similar topics