Abruzzo project: Villa Eventhyr
The story of how easy it is, during a renovation, to confuse trust with professionalism.In other words: save yourself from an "&"
Part III
The contract..
Just a few months earlier, we had discussed a budget of around 100–110 thousand euros.
Our surprise was therefore enormous when, in the email received, the indicative cost of the investment was estimated between 160 and even 350 thousand euros net for the renovation of two buildings with a total area of about 120 m². The only item related to the foundations and structure ranged between 50 and 110 thousand euros.
The gap was so wide that it made it practically impossible to assess the actual cost of the company. We began to ask more questions, and the more questions we asked, the less at ease we felt.
We asked to correct the contract. Through certified mail (PEC), we received one and then a second version of the document that, unfortunately, still contained numerous errors. In the second version, the location for the execution of the service was even indicated as the area of Lake Como, almost 500 kilometers away from our home in Manoppello. Despite this, we still tried to look at everything benevolently. We thought it was just simple oversights due to haste and not a lack of professionalism.
After returning to Poland, I dedicated an entire day to detailed analysis of the documents, refining many clauses and adjusting the contract to Italian legal regulations. I tried to protect the interests of both parties, based on the previously agreed amount of around 110 thousand euros for the renovation of the property.
In the meantime, we were also analyzing more deeply the extent of the planned structural work. The more we read about buildings constructed on clayey soil, the more our doubts grew about whether digging around the foundations of the entire building simultaneously was truly the best solution. The house had cracks, but it had been stable for many years. We became increasingly convinced that the main problem was not the foundations, but rather the water drainage system.
We submitted our proposed modifications and, after a few days, we received a new estimate.
The amount was around 95 thousand euros. At first glance, it seemed promising, but upon closer inspection, it emerged that the renovation of the outbuilding had disappeared from the bill of quantities. It was hardly a simple oversight.
At that point, the warning signs were too many, and although it wasn't easy, we made the decision not to sign the contract.
Every investor knows this feeling. On one hand, there is the fear of missing out on a good opportunity; on the other, the awareness grows that ignoring one's doubts can prove much more costly than a change of plans.
It seemed that the most difficult part of this story was behind us. We were wrong, because soon another problem arose: the one related to the windows.
After giving up the contract, we intended to place the order directly with the manufacturer. However, the deposit had been paid through the contractor P., as at that stage of the collaboration it seemed the simplest solution and offered tax benefits. When the situation around the contract began to complicate, problems also arose regarding the collection of the fixtures. We received a message that we remember very well: "I decide who can pick up the windows. Just a phone call. I have the contract with them."
To be honest, our blood ran cold. The windows had been custom-made specifically for our house. They were not a product that could simply be sold to another customer. In practical terms, we risked losing both the deposit and the ordered fixtures.
After numerous discussions between the contractor, the manufacturer, and us, after a few weeks we managed to find a solution. We obtained a refund of the deposit paid, settled the accounts directly with the manufacturer, and in the end, we took our windows. In that particular aspect, the affair seemed to have concluded positively.
But the end of this chapter with the contractor P. was not meant to be this.
As a comment
In medicine, a diagnosis rarely hinges on a single symptom. More often, it involves a series of seemingly disconnected small signals: an anomaly in the tests, nonspecific ailments, or a slight alteration in the ECG. On their own, they don't mean much, but together they create a picture that cannot be ignored. The same applies to large projects. The unease grows gradually: first one inconsistency, then another, and questions without clear answers. Eventually, a pattern starts to emerge. This does not necessarily herald a failure, but it is worth pausing to reassess the situation. In medicine, this is called differential diagnosis; in life – intuition. They are two definitions of the same process.
A website created in the WebWavewebsite builder.
Via
Manoppello, 65024