ᐅ Price Increase – Our Construction Company Wants 21.4% More

Markiso schrieb:

This actually goes too far here, but I don’t understand why you can’t (or won’t) grasp it. Maybe you haven’t read or followed the thread fully. I’ll try again:
I said that I believe the legal position of small, often non-expert homeowners in building law is generally far too weak and that this should (in my opinion) be significantly changed. I did not specify exactly how. The right of withdrawal was just an arbitrary example of how well consumers can be protected if there is a will to do so. I specifically mentioned that I’m not advocating for a right of withdrawal in building law (which logically makes no sense, but for specialists like you I explicitly said it 😀) and regarding Pinki that was definitely not what I meant—it was a general statement.

I have followed the thread completely. I suspect I have known Pinki’s story much longer than you. But that really doesn’t matter.
My actual question remains unanswered. You use a clearly defined, understandable, and correct law as an example related to what happened to Pinki. I ask: how would a comparable law need to look to have protected Pinki from this situation?
Still, you are right, this goes too far.

Tarnari schrieb:

My original question remains unanswered. You take a clearly defined, understandable, and correct law as an example regarding what happened to Pinki. I’m asking, what would a comparable law look like that would have protected Pinki from this situation?

Are you doing this on purpose now... or do you really mean it? 😀
I’ve already repeatedly said that I was NOT referring to Pinki. How much clearer do I need to say that? It’s just not possible. Your question may seem unanswered to you, but that’s because it does not address what I have said or written. There is nothing to answer... I simply never expressed what you keep claiming or misunderstanding.

And again, my point was only to give an example of how consumers can be put in difficult positions, not that I want a right of withdrawal in the construction sector. This is in reference to the discussion briefly held here between me and, for example, 11ant and others in this thread, or more precisely, regarding my statement/opinion about how poor the legal situation generally is for small-scale homebuilders in construction law.

Myrna_Loy schrieb:

Well, providing information is the responsibility of the recipient, not the provider. Since January, the rapid price increases have been sweeping through the new housing developments – I would have sought a discussion by March at the latest to find out what to expect. I wouldn’t have gone relaxed to a material selection meeting two months after the fixed-price period ended.
Since the start of the price surge, we have repeatedly asked the trades whether the calculations were still accurate. That’s part of the process when building.

In fact, I assumed the contractor would inform us about any price changes (in a formal letter, with explanation, notice of cancellation periods, termination conditions, etc.) and I was waiting for that from June 30 onward, when the price guarantee expired – not that we should have to ask. When I signed the contract in December 2019, I wanted to know beforehand from the company whether price increases were expected in 2020; otherwise, we would have taken more time. Back then, the forum advised me this was unwise, because it could provoke price increases.

Addendum, since the processing time was exceeded:
After nothing happened by June 30th, I even thought, “Oh, how nice of them, they aren’t even charging us the additional 0.4% per month,” and I was absolutely impressed with the company. :-) I never expected that they would inform “customers” who have a 4.5-hour (4.5-hour) travel time late in the afternoon, just before the office closes, that they have to pay xx% more. But I was already warned in the forum that the construction industry is “special,” and I have read some shocking examples from you here. Actually, for exactly this reason, I wanted a well-established company from Germany. With what I know now, I would always prefer buying an existing building, despite all its disadvantages. And, even though I will probably be “reprimanded” for this now, I didn’t even deduct the 5% from the first payment, which was due before the selection of fittings and finishes, that I could have deducted (I forgot the exact term), because it didn’t seem fair to me. Looking back, I can only laugh at that now ... you really have to be that naive at first. 🙂

Pinkiponk schrieb:

When making the first payment, which was due before selecting finishes, I didn’t even deduct the 5% that I could have deducted—although I’ve forgotten the exact term—because it didn’t seem fair to me.

We didn’t do that either back then. We weren’t aware of it.

Pinkiponk schrieb:

You really have to be that foolish. 🙂

… in our case, nothing changed because of it. I wouldn’t call it foolishness. After all, building a house is not something to argue over.

ypg schrieb:

We didn’t know about it either back then.

… nothing changed for us because of it. I wouldn’t call it foolishness. After all, building a house isn’t a reason to argue.

Thank you, I appreciate your understanding.