Bröselstein scandal

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The so-called Bröselstein scandal is about damaged houses made of sand-lime bricks produced by the Xella company. These were produced using a lime substitute from flue gas desulphurisation systems . Cracks or deformations can occur if the sand-lime bricks are exposed to permanent moisture penetration. These sand-lime bricks were manufactured between 1987 and 1996 in three Haniel building materials plants (now Xella ).

background

In a report from the Federal Association of Sand-Lime Bricks Industry eV from 1987, concerns were expressed about the durability of the bricks. The association did not contradict the production and sale of the stones.

According to Xella, there is no danger to the residents. In all cases there was at no time the risk of the stones losing their load-bearing capacity leading to the collapse of the building. "Even if the well-known damage pattern is there and the stone crumbles, the masonry still has an enormous load-bearing capacity," said the chairman of the Xella management in an interview with the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung. In the same interview, he stated that experts confirmed this statement.

According to Stern, criminal prosecution of those responsible cannot be ruled out. However, there are currently no preliminary proceedings pending against the company. The responsible building authorities also see no reason to investigate Xella.

Xella and Haniel have not yet been able to confirm the number of 45,000 houses mentioned by Stern and the amount of damage between 2.5 and 4.5 billion euros. According to Xella, a quantification of the possibly affected buildings is not possible on the basis of the available information and any estimate is therefore dubious. The whereabouts of the product are fundamentally difficult to understand for a building material producer due to the distribution channels. Xella told the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung in December 2011 that it was not possible to determine exactly how many damaged sand-lime bricks were actually in circulation. According to company information, the last remaining amount was used at the beginning of 1997.

According to an article in the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, the Haniel company bears the economic damage, which so far has amounted to 28 million euros. Haniel put another 30 million back on the balance sheet. So far, 382 cases have been confirmed by Xella, of which 160 houses have already been renovated by Xella. The majority of the houses affected are terraced or semi-detached houses in Duisburg and on the Lower Rhine. On December 8, 2011, the company published an overview of the regions affected in the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung.

According to an article in the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung on October 5, 2013, a judge’s verdict could be expensive for the group. The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court (decision of April 29, 2013 - 5 W 9/13) sees signs of deliberate immoral damage to homeowners by the former Haniel building material works. They are therefore suspected of having insufficiently tested millions of damaged sand-lime bricks, spreading them and accepting the damage. Haniel is cautious about the OLG assessment. Homeowners' associations and lawyers speak of "a far-reaching decision that could point the way for the injured party". "§ 826 BGB could open the money faucet again," says the Moers lawyer Alexander Götz to the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, which represents Bröselstein victims. The text of the law reads: "Anyone who deliberately harms another person in a manner that is contrary to good morals is obliged to compensate the other person for the damage." The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court considers precisely this claim for damages against Haniel to be "conclusively presented" - by one of the unsuspecting homeowners whose intimate home was built with crumbling stones. The OLG granted the plaintiff legal aid, which the Duisburg Regional Court had previously rejected. The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court had "only decided the application for legal aid differently, without a detailed factual examination of the claim for damages," says Haniel. The decision goes into pretty much detail. The judges see evidence that profit may have gone before security. “It is undisputed” that “profit maximization” was involved when Haniel manufactured the stones with cheap additives. The manufacturer had "concrete indications" that the stones "could not be sufficiently stable" - and thus the obligation to "have all technically possible examinations carried out" in order to be able to "rule out" the danger and the resulting damage. The plaintiff had "adequately demonstrated that the investigations were technically inadequate," says the OLG. And: Since the injured party has proven that there are cheap crumbs in his house, he “conclusively demonstrated the defendant's liability under Section 826 of the German Civil Code”. Experts speculated that things could get tricky for Haniel. "With this in mind, § 826 is a hot paragraph for the manufacturer," says Manfred Hüttemann, lawyer at Haus & Grund in Dortmund. It may also be an “abuse of economic power” because: “A manufacturer who manufactures damaged stones cheaply and sells them at high prices gains a great economic advantage over competitors.” If it can be proven “that he is fully aware of this did it, it can be very expensive, ”says Hüttemann. Detlef Erm, managing director and legal advisor from the association Wohneigentum NRW based in Dortmund, sees hardly a back door. Haniel's advice that the stone was “only intended as a back stone” and would not have been exposed to moisture could hardly be legally valid. "Because such restrictions should have been explicitly and publicly pointed out," says Erm. Instead, the manufacturer “deliberately accepted that the stones were unsuspectingly installed everywhere”. Erm assumes that the judges “see and evaluate the immoral intent to cause damage similarly in the main proceedings”. Lawyer Götz sees the claims of his clients and other Bröselstein victims "basically not barred until today". Even those who now find building damage and have not yet initiated a lawsuit can make claims for damages against the company Xella, the legal successor of Haniel-Baustoffwerke. Haniel and Xella did not comment on this option when asked by the Westdeutsche Zeitung.

Possible repairs by Haniel

After the damage became known, according to Haniel, around 2,000 homeowners had reported to Xella International GmbH since 2011 that the so-called crumble stones could have been installed. According to Haniel, around 1,300 of these houses are said to have been appraised, in particular by DEKRA Industrial GmbH on behalf of Haniel. According to Haniel, only 25% were built with the crumbs . These owners are or were then invited to information events organized by Haniel Immobilien GmbH & Co. KG, which was founded in 2013. This company was founded due to the multi-million dollar risks posed by defective sand-lime bricks and the risks were outsourced there, but only has a very small capital contribution. A goodwill offer from Haniel Immobilien is presented to the injured party at the events. It guarantees that the damaged houses will be partially renovated at the expense of Haniel Immobilien. Then the injured parties receive a written offer to accept, the so-called repair contract, which for some houses is very extensive and up to the size of a thumb. According to press reports, numerous risks of this repair contract for the injured party would be possible through these contracts, in particular the loss of the payment of a mercantile depreciation .

Charge of fraud

At the beginning of August 2014, an expert report was published in the press, which certifies that Haniel knowingly sold inferior cheap products as sand-lime bricks, which however were not. In particular, no lime was used, but instead industrial waste. According to this source, wrong test seals are also said to have been used for the delivery notes. According to a victim's attorney, this constitutes serious fraud under Section 263 of the Criminal Code. Haniel vehemently rejected the fraud allegation one day later. According to Haniel, dozens of independent reports, also commissioned by various chambers of the Duisburg Regional Court, have left no doubt about the DIN-compliant production of the sand-lime bricks. The values ​​determined in the individual report are not correct. Furthermore, the limit value mentioned in the individual report does not exist. Allegedly, even this individual report comes to the conclusion that it cannot be proven whether the stones are from the former Haniel building material works.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  2. ↑ Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  3. ↑ Xella press release. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  4. ↑ Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  5. ↑ Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  6. ^ Rheinische Post. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  7. ↑ Press release Xella. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  8. ↑ Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved January 11, 2012 .
  9. ↑ derwesten.de
  10. ↑ derwesten-recherche.org
  11. ↑ derwesten.de
  12. ↑ derwesten.de of August 5, 2014: Haniel under pressure , accessed on August 5, 2014.
  13. ↑ Haniel website from August 7, 2014: Company News , accessed on August 7, 2014.

Web links