Far as I know you signed a legal contract and that is all they are bound to give. The plans were drawn, finalized and signed after the contract so technically they probably don't mean much at all as to what your to be given.

What you signed, i.e. the spec sheet, is what you get. You can't even call it bait and switch, because you never incorporated any of the changes into the contract in the first place. The blueprints would have had to be done first (The normal way of doing business), and incorporated by definition into the contract for you to receive all of the upgrades at the contract price. Unless you are willing to pay all of the upgrade fees to get those upgrades, you're going to get a basic home.

Thanks for the feedback. I see what you are saying. I will admit, the process we went through was a little unorthodox. This builder is a small family company, and although they have been very flexible, getting clear answers has been difficult throughout the process.

We were pressured pretty heavily to sign something, and gave in a bit more than we should have. BUT new land around us is unheard of (you'd have to travel 40 minutes away), and this lot was in our existing neighborhood, so we really wanted to do this venture.

Once we had the floorplan, the builder basically said they weren't having the architect (their architect) do further work until we signed something. I guess we should have fought that but we didn't know the normal process.

So there really was no other game in town (the builder owned the land), and although we didn't let them know it, we really wanted this, and no doubt gave in more than we should have. And no doubt, didn't push certain issues. But we also didn't have an agent in the process, even though we did run the contract/specs by a real estate attorney as well as by another builder I know.

So basically, we were a bit ignorant on lots of stuff. I'm not making excuses.. just wanted to let you know a little more background on our situation.

The answer lies in your construction contract, and whatever references it makes to drawings and/or specifications. Since this situation was between you and the builder, your only standing is based on the language in your construction contract. None of us have seen this, so none of us know the terms of your construction contract.

In more normal situations, where an owner commissions an architect as the owner's agent, BOTH drawings AND specifications are bound together as the "construction documents" referenced in the construction contract. It's just another reason to consider using the services of an architect and AIA contracts which are acknowledged as the "standard of the construction industry".

When one short circuits this general practice, it's up to the owner to protect themselves.

Good luck on your project.

When an owner presents a contractor with a contract, drawings and specifications, the order of authority is first the contract then any addenda, the specification and then the drawings. The owner is responsible for the accuracy of the documents and the contractor is responsible for reviewing the documents and informing the owner of any errors or discrepancies.

When an owner enters into a "design-build" contract there should first be a design phase where the owner is obligated to pay for the design and documents then when a construction price is agreed upon a construction contract would be signed.

For homes it is a common practice for a contractor to provide design services with the expectation that the owner will eventually sign a construction contract. This method puts great pressure on the contractor to get the contract signed as quickly as possible which puts the owner at a great disadvantage so I don't recommend it.

Since the contractor is in full control of the design, a "specification" is often not a description of materials and installation requirements but a list of features.

At any rate, any owner-contractor contract should clearly state which documents have the higher authority and the contractor should be responsible for coordination, not the owner. If these clauses are missing from the contract and you were asked to sign the drawings rather than the specification, I think you have the right to expect to get what was shown on the drawings.

You now have a very poorly coordinated set of contract documents but since the contractor was responsible for preparing the contract, the specification and the drawings, there can be no doubt who is at fault.