Planned DIN standard for residential buildings: Do you soon make living more expensive?

More bureaucracy that makes living even more expensive – that is probably the last thing people currently want. No wonder that corresponding reports are currently making large waves. A new DIN standard for residential buildings ensure that homeowners are made in rows of new security specifications. The planned “building TÜV” means a “cost shock” for tenants, to which the additional costs are ultimately passed on, the Bild newspaper writes.

But is that really? The German Institute for Standardization (DIN), from which the paper comes, speaks in a statement of a “misleading presentation” of the Bild newspaper. The report on impending massive financial burdens for tenants and owners falls too short in important points and are distorted by facts. So what is it all about?

Document of the kick -off is the “DIN 94681”, a draft for the “traffic safety check for residential buildings – regular test froutes in the context of visual tests and state reviews, basics and testing”. 40 pages full of test methods for potential dangers and checklists for areas such as “fire protection”, “fall and fall protection” or “gas lines”. At first glance, that actually sounds like pure bureaucratic horror.

On the other hand, it is not fundamentally new that homeowners have to take care that their gas lines do not explode and that nobody falls on the head. The DIN explains that the planned standard only “summarizes the requirements already existing on the basis of laws and regulations in a practical guide” and concretize them. “The planned standard is created as a guide for owners and operators of residential buildings.”

And above all, the DIN emphasizes, a standard is different from a law. It is a recommendation whose application is voluntary. “Only if the legislator prescribes its compliance will standing binding. Such legal into account is not intended for this standard.” So much excitement about nothing?

The owner association Haus & Grund explains on request that owners have so far been “subject to traffic safety”, so they would have to ensure that there is no danger from their house or property. In the norm, however, “precisely stipulated in a way, what the owner has to check annually, how he has to document it,”, criticizes association manager Alexander Wiech.

In principle, the DIN standard has only a recommendation character. However, this is different if courts refer to it in the future or laws and building regulations refer to it and insurers accept the standards in their insurance conditions. Liability insurance could refuse the service if the owner has not adhered to the standard. “Some of the requirements would also be so high that a private owner could not do this and would have to commission a service provider,” feared WIECH. “This would further increase the costs of living for tenants and for self -use owners.”

The Association GDW, which represents apartment and real estate companies, looks similar. “We reject the norm because it not only has a recommendable character, but also a legal effect,” says Fabian Viehrig, Head of Building and Technology at the GDW star. You do not need more precise requirements for how often landlords have to check whether roof tiles are loose or staircase lighting. In order not to make themselves legally attackable, the companies would have to keep the norms in detail. And increased exams or training of the caretaker cost money, says Viehrig. “The bottom line would not lead the standard to a cost explosion, but still to significant additional costs. These could be passed on to the tenants.”

The DIN, on the other hand, explains “additional costs that go beyond the fulfillment of legal obligations” are “not to be expected” by the standard. Apart from that, you are ready for a constructive dialogue with everyone involved. The draft about the new DIN standard should be discussed publicly until April 7th.