{"id":64733,"date":"2025-02-18T23:33:03","date_gmt":"2025-02-18T22:33:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cecile-zakine.fr\/?page_id=64733"},"modified":"2025-02-18T23:37:51","modified_gmt":"2025-02-18T22:37:51","slug":"difference-entre-cccmi-et-vefa","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.cecile-zakine.fr\/en\/difference-entre-cccmi-et-vefa\/","title":{"rendered":"Auto draft"},"content":{"rendered":"
[et_pb_section fb_built= \u00bb1\u2033 _builder_version= \u00bb4.27.4\u2033 _module_preset= \u00bbdefault \u00bb global_colors_info= \u00bb{} \u00bb][et_pb_row _builder_version= \u00bb4.27.4\u2033 _module_preset= \u00bbdefault \u00bb global_colors_info= \u00bb{} \u00bb][et_pb_column type= \u00bb4_4\u2033 _builder_version= \u00bb4.27.4\u2033 _module_preset= \u00bbdefault \u00bb global_colors_info= \u00bb{} \u00bb][et_pb_text _builder_version= \u00bb4.27.4\u2033 _module_preset= \u00bbdefault \u00bb global_colors_info= \u00bb{} \u00bb]<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=\u00a0\u00bb4.27.4″ _module_preset=\u00a0\u00bbdefault\u00a0\u00bb global_colors_info=\u00a0\u00bb{}\u00a0\u00bb]<\/p>\n
The individual house construction contract (CCMI) and the sale in future state of completion (VEFA) are two legal regimes governing the construction of new homes in France. While both contracts aim to protect buyers, the CCMI offers additional guarantees compared to the VEFA. We will examine in detail the specific features of the CCMI that make it a more protective contract, drawing on legislative and regulatory texts as well as legal doctrine.<\/p>\n
Article L. 231-1 of the Construction and Housing Code (CCH) provides that the CCMI is "the contract by which the builder undertakes to the project owner to construct a building for residential or mixed use on land belonging to the latter." This contract must be drawn up in writing and include a certain number of mandatory details listed in Article L. 231-2 of the CCH, in particular the precise designation of the land and the work to be carried out, as well as the technical characteristics of the building.<\/p>\n
The builder is required, under Article 1604 of the Civil Code, to deliver a work that complies with the contractual stipulations. Case law has clarified the scope of this obligation of conformity: the Court of Cassation thus considers that the purchaser is entitled to demand strict conformity of the construction with the contractual provisions (Cass. 3rd civ., May 11, 2011, no. 10-11.527). Failing this, the builder incurs contractual liability. This obligation of conformity is stricter under the CCMI than for the VEFA.<\/p>\n
Article L. 231-6 of the CCH provides that the manufacturer is required, upon conclusion of the contract, to subscribe to a delivery guarantee. This guarantee, issued by a financial institution, a credit institution or an insurance company approved for this purpose, is intended to reimburse payments made in the event of default by the manufacturer (bankruptcy, liquidation, etc.).<\/p>\n
The delivery guarantee constitutes one of the major protections of the CCMI. As Professor Philippe Malinvaud explains, "this guarantee is a security that protects the project owner from the consequences of the builder's default" (Construction Law, Dalloz Action, 2019, no. 473.340). Its mandatory nature and the strict conditions surrounding its implementation make it a particularly effective tool for protecting buyers. Such a guarantee does not exist within the framework of the VEFA.<\/p>\n
Article L. 271-1 of the CCH grants the non-professional purchaser a 10-day withdrawal period from the day after the first presentation of the letter notifying him of the deed. During this period, no payment may be required.<\/p>\n
This right of withdrawal allows the buyer to withdraw from their initial commitment if they wish, without having to provide any specific reasons. This is an exorbitant prerogative of common contract law, which reflects the legislator's desire to ensure enhanced protection for the buyer of off-plan housing. Indeed, as Professor Hugues P\u00e9rinet-Marquet points out, "in because of the importance of commitment and the fact that training<\/a> of the contract often takes place under the influence of aggressive commercial techniques", it was appropriate to allow the purchaser "to exercise his reflection with a clear head" (JCP N 1990, 101067). This right of withdrawal does not exist in the matter of VEFA.<\/p>\n Article L. 231-8 of the CCH states that the builder is liable to the project owner for the guarantees provided for in Articles 1792, 1792-1, 1792-2 and 1792-3 of the Civil Code. These provisions establish a system of legal guarantees applicable to the builder:<\/p>\nB. Guarantees of proper functioning, perfect completion and ten-year warranty<\/h3>\n
\n