ᐅ Sewer pipe embedded in the wrong location within the foundation slab
Created on: 13 Sep 2012 16:04
B
bw-baublog
Hello,
Yesterday, our foundation slab was poured. Today we visited the site and the basement walls were marked out. We noticed that in one room, which is a living space with underfloor heating, the drain pipe for a utility sink does not come directly out of the slab near the wall but about 1 meter (3.3 feet) away, in the middle of the room. All other pipes come out in the correct places, right next to the walls.
When I asked the construction manager about this, he casually said, "The team probably measured incorrectly." However, he said this is not a problem. They would simply use a smaller drain pipe (2 inches) and route it through the insulation on the foundation slab under the underfloor heating to the main drain.
My question is: Is this an acceptable solution? Does this represent a defect? Could this create a thermal bridge in the insulated house? Or should we not accept this as is?
Thank you in advance for your answers.
Yesterday, our foundation slab was poured. Today we visited the site and the basement walls were marked out. We noticed that in one room, which is a living space with underfloor heating, the drain pipe for a utility sink does not come directly out of the slab near the wall but about 1 meter (3.3 feet) away, in the middle of the room. All other pipes come out in the correct places, right next to the walls.
When I asked the construction manager about this, he casually said, "The team probably measured incorrectly." However, he said this is not a problem. They would simply use a smaller drain pipe (2 inches) and route it through the insulation on the foundation slab under the underfloor heating to the main drain.
My question is: Is this an acceptable solution? Does this represent a defect? Could this create a thermal bridge in the insulated house? Or should we not accept this as is?
Thank you in advance for your answers.
Surely the contractor could be willing to compromise, but I think you’ve lost that chance?!I haven’t spoken to the contractor more than arranging an appointment to clarify things, which he didn’t show up for. I haven’t even been able to present my proposal yet. All I know from the site manager is that he’s acting a bit strangely at the moment. That’s it.
I think your mistake is believing you have a right to the cost difference between the 50mm (2 inch) pipe and opening the foundation. You have a right to the temporary solution and maybe also the planned solution.I don’t have any misunderstanding yet. Just to remind you: I only wanted to know what opening the slab, connecting the pipe underneath, and resealing it “could” cost so that when I do get the contractor to agree to a meeting, I would at least have a basis for discussion. And in that discussion, I “could” argue that the trench for the supply line is probably mid-range in cost and might be a good compromise for both him and me. But instead, I’m getting pages of lectures here...
I’m not a lawyer, but the most important thing is that the function is ensured!That’s correct. And it will be (the plumber will handle it). Only if the contractor wants to maintain a good reputation with me (everything else has been done fully to satisfaction so far, except for this one mishap), it would be nice if he could be a bit flexible.
That’s another matter, but it can’t be forced either.No, a goodwill gesture can’t be forced. Nor do I want to.
I just wanted a confirmation of the estimated cost to open the floor slab. What I do with that and where it leads me: yes, it’s fair to point that out and question it briefly. I think that’s okay and reasonable. What I do with it again: that’s my call... Instead, I’m getting page after page of lectures...
Regardless of how this continues and whether it’s right, wrong, or simply foolish: is it really so hard to answer a relatively simple question? If necessary, “it’s absolutely impossible to estimate, not even roughly” would be sufficient. But honestly, all the beating around the bush is getting a little annoying.
P
perlenmann10 Oct 2013 11:12tuxedo schrieb:
But instead, I get pages full of attempts to lecture me ...And what could be the reason for that?
Well, you want to hear a price? Your 1000€ (about 1100 USD) is close enough! That’s what I would say! But how does that help you?
You won’t avoid having to pay someone to get a reliable statement about the costs!
I’m keeping my fingers crossed that we never accidentally enter into a contractual relationship with each other. Basically, your arguments are largely valid from an objective standpoint. However, there is also another aspect beyond that, and this is where it becomes narrow-minded. This narrow-mindedness might become an obstacle for you during the further construction phase, as it’s quite certain that this won’t be the only issue affecting your project.
One thing can be assumed with relative certainty: people in the construction industry often know each other quite well, and this drama will likely spread quickly. That won’t be an advantage overall, at least not in the end.
If he has probably already incurred a loss and then offers a viable and good solution to the problem, then everything is fine. So why brandish the heavy hammer here and grumble like a Neanderthal?
I can only recommend that you read accessible commentaries on § 635 of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) and try to understand that you cannot dictate to the contractor how to remedy the defects; the contractor alone has the right to choose the method. Furthermore, things will get complicated for you if the re-performance adequately fulfills the original purpose, but you still try to enforce something like "... you must pay because it’s not exactly as it is shown in the drawing."
I would be glad to read about the outcome of such a dispute here.
One thing can be assumed with relative certainty: people in the construction industry often know each other quite well, and this drama will likely spread quickly. That won’t be an advantage overall, at least not in the end.
If he has probably already incurred a loss and then offers a viable and good solution to the problem, then everything is fine. So why brandish the heavy hammer here and grumble like a Neanderthal?
I can only recommend that you read accessible commentaries on § 635 of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) and try to understand that you cannot dictate to the contractor how to remedy the defects; the contractor alone has the right to choose the method. Furthermore, things will get complicated for you if the re-performance adequately fulfills the original purpose, but you still try to enforce something like "... you must pay because it’s not exactly as it is shown in the drawing."
I would be glad to read about the outcome of such a dispute here.
So, can you help me now?
During the appointment for the house water connection, it was discovered that the wastewater pipes are 20cm (8 inches) too deep. Of course, a lifting station was immediately offered.
The site manager's reaction was that this is our problem.
In March, we had to resubmit a building permit / planning permission application because the foundation slab is 18cm (7 inches) higher than originally submitted. We don’t know what to do anymore.
Apparently, we should have measured on the day the pipes were laid and the concrete was poured.
During the appointment for the house water connection, it was discovered that the wastewater pipes are 20cm (8 inches) too deep. Of course, a lifting station was immediately offered.
The site manager's reaction was that this is our problem.
In March, we had to resubmit a building permit / planning permission application because the foundation slab is 18cm (7 inches) higher than originally submitted. We don’t know what to do anymore.
Apparently, we should have measured on the day the pipes were laid and the concrete was poured.
Similar topics