Typical cost items within this category are expenses in connection with ascertaining a deficiency, often with the help of expert assessments or assistance from lawyers. Such costs can often be large if the deficiencies are serious or extensive.
Direct and necessary expenses
There is no financial ceiling that limits the contractor’s financial responsibility for rectifying errors and defects. The only limitation is that the expenses must be a direct and necessary consequence of the improvement.
In order to determine whether the expenses in question can be claimed to be covered by the contractor, a concrete assessment of the expenses must be made.
The expenditure items
If no deficiency is found, the expenses in connection with expert assessments are probably not necessary.
In those cases where it is concluded that there is no deficiency, no rectification will therefore be carried out either. The result must then be that the consumer himself must cover incurred expenses.
Nor can it be the case that the expenses related to expert assessments are considered necessary, if they are obtained before it has been clarified that the deficiency is disputed by the contractor.
The same applies in cases where the contractor and the consumer agree on the existence and extent of the defect. In such cases, the contractor will normally meet the consumer’s requirements, without interference from third parties. The same must apply when using legal assistance.
The relevance of the expenses
It is also clear that the expenses must also be directly related to the potential correction.
In those cases where the expenses of experts relate to matters other than the specific defect objection, it is clear that the consumer must foot the bill himself.
Proportionality limitation
Embedded in the necessity criterion is also a limitation of proportionality.
A contractor cannot, for example, be obliged to cover costs to a greater extent than is strictly necessary to have the defect identified and corrected, in line with the contract between the parties.
If the consumer uses more expensive or larger resources than is necessary, the contractor cannot be held responsible for the entire amount. In such cases, it can probably also be questioned whether the requirement is necessary at all.
Additional remuneration for more expensive solutions
In certain situations, the contractor can make a claim for additional compensation against the consumer after rectification has been completed. This typically happens in those cases where the correction gives the consumer a result and a solution that is qualitatively better and more expensive than what the consumer originally paid for.
It is also obvious that the contractor can make a claim for additional compensation against the consumer, if the consumer has chosen materials or more expensive solutions than were necessary to carry out the improvement.
In order for the contractor to be able to make a claim for additional remuneration against the consumer, two conditions must be met. The work or materials may not be included in the original price and the work or materials may be necessary even without the deficiency.
Written by: attorney/partner Jarle Edler and associate attorney Emilie Fekete, i Bing Hodneland law firm AND.
2023-09-23 05:30:00
#Responsibility #improvement #costs #buying #home
