Forum
« Deck to Replace Screened Porch Magic Chef 1000 Stove »
July 18, 2009
Claims Against an Architect
maybe a touchy subject but has anyone ever sued their architect after a project for E&O (errors and omissions). what was the experience like? what was the outcome? would you do it again?
ours has made three errors related to fire code that has resulted in ~$10K in unnecessary costs. he acknowledges an overly conservative reading of the regulations, apologizes and then ... that's it. i'm glad he's learning as he goes but its absurd that he does it on my dime.
i contacted a construction claims and litigation specialist who said its too small a claim to hire a lawyer/outside consultant. but it's a real hit to my wallet and i want him to share that pain.
is it just too tedious to pursue for that amount? is it up to me to vet his decisions before i sign off on them? or is it all "buyer beware"?
i know there are great architects out there. i won't let him sully your profession.
Comments
Well you can re-negotiate fee or sue him.
THe problem with Architects, and I'm one of them , is that the profession allows for such a broad range of "types" and most people are "designers"...so practical matters such as engineering isssues,building code, construction documents or construction administration may not be something they often engage in when practicing.
Recently I was casually discussing a project with a colleague/friend, it's her project and she is unemployed but is freelancing on her own. Anyway, it's a small addition in DC and I cannot believe half the stuff that she was leaving out and not considering regarding mechanical and electrical issues.Her experience prior to being laid off was as a manager so she may be rusty though she is a good designer.
Posted by: argentina at July 18, 2009 10:39 PM
You say he was "overly conservative", That implies 2 things to me. First of all he wasn't really wrong in his interpretation and he simply erred on the side of safety. His real mistake was being too honest and not giving you a story as to why he in good conscious was being "overly conservative" for your sake, Building Code be damned.
Posted by: mod squad at July 19, 2009 7:38 AM
A person CAN NOT LEGALLY CALL THEMSELVES AN ARCHITECT IF THEY ARE UNLICENSED. If a person refers to themselves as a designer or anything else other than an ARCHITECT, it's because they do not have state certification. If someone uses the term ARCHITECT without a license, notify the state licensing board and the American Institute of Architects, they will be heavily penalized.
An architect, should be carrying insurance for errors and omissions. It shouldn't be too hard to file a claim against their insurance. If they do not have errors and omissions insurance, then quite frankly THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS OPERATING AN OFFICE, and you shouldn't feel bad suing them into oblivion.
Carefully reread the contract you have with the person. Is it a standard AIA contract?
Posted by: FenFen at July 19, 2009 12:12 PM
it's a standard AIA contract. the architect is licensed. they just don't know the code and have twice over-designed to regulations that don't apply to this property. the first time we realized well before we did the work, but he did not reimburse us for the significant amount of his time spent creating a plan that was totally inappropriate/unnecessary based on his erroneous interpretation of the code. he acknowledged the mistake but did not make us whole on it. the second time involved the fire doors. i appreciate the feedback. tx / Avi
Posted by: iddelz at July 19, 2009 7:32 PM
i personally would eat the loss and chalk it up to nyc experience...if you have a valid c of o after a renovation you should be thanking your architect not whining about extra costs..the dob under bloomberg has become a fee generator, with inspectors acting as bounty hunters for code violations.. your architect was correct to take a conservative approach to code and you are an ungrateful wretch to not realize that a had he or she taken a creative approach to code his license could have been suspended...you should be thanking your architect instead of suing him
Posted by: eman1234 at July 19, 2009 9:38 PM
I bet put can solar panels on your roof for 10k. Id sue him after the C of O.
Posted by: jack slade at July 19, 2009 10:59 PM
^you can put
Posted by: jack slade at July 19, 2009 11:14 PM
Architect here.
The truth is that architects tend to be more conservative when it comes to fire code because it is a liability to NOT be so. This is the same reason that structural engineers tend to over-design their solutions as well...to ensure that the safety and well-being of the inhabitants are not in question. Believe me, the liability involved with being lax on fire code is staggering, and it can result in the architect losing their license and career. Moreover, being more conservative with fire code is not necessarily a mistake, even if the end product was not what you really wanted.
I would probably have a different response if it was in relation to major millwork mistakes, or a lack of coordination between his/her consultants, or designing a plan that in no way fits the existing space, etc...but when it comes to fire and other safety codes, I have to side with the architect on this one. We generally do not go out of our way to research how close we can get to complying with code without actually breaking the law, and it's unreasonable to expect your architect to have done so for you.
If you completely disagree, you should have a discussion with them and see if you can work something out. I have worked for architects who have made adjustments to their fees if they felt it was warranted...Though if it was me, I have to admit I too would not offer to adjust my fee in this instance.
Posted by: 60designers at July 20, 2009 11:33 AM
Are you the same person who posted earlier about how your architect was demanding fire-proof doors for a Victorian two-family rowhouse? If so, then it sounds like the problem is the architect has ZERO experience with small residential projects and designed something totally inappropriate, not that he or she was too "conservative."
Reminds me of the architect who worked only on new construction and was shocked -- shocked!!!!!!!!! -- when the kitchen appliances he specified and designed into the space could not be used because of lack of 220 volt wiring in a pre war coop and also lack of plumbing on the non-sink side of the kitchen. IDIOT.
Posted by: mopar at July 20, 2009 10:27 PM
same. yes. and yes. all around idiot. 10 gallon ego and 1 oz brain. lookit, we all make mistakes, and certainly there are judgments involved, but i shouldn't be the only party carrying the impact of his consistent and expensive mistakes.
so ... last post from me ... has anyone done this before? what's the process? how long does it take? i assume it starts with a letter and ends on judge judy. can anyone recommend some reference material? tx / iddelz
Posted by: iddelz at July 21, 2009 11:01 PM
The architects posting about "over" building have made valid points, it does not sound like any actual mistakes were made here, or that you have any true explanation as to WHY the architect designed what he did. All you may need is an open conversation, undertaken in a manner that is NOT threatening, to understand what really happened. You may both see each other's point of view and come to an agreement. What is it you really want? What would really help your situation? Getting a little bit of the money back, redoing some of the work, or if you realized you had paid for a very high-quality construction would you feel better about having spent the money?
If you insist on pursuing something, and a direct conversation does not bring results, can I suggest you work with a certified mediator, rather than pursuing this through the courts? Lawyers fees will eat up far more than $10K very quickly, and suing to get revenge is a bad motivation. Too many times people fire up an intimidation letter and it's usually unnecessary. At least working with a mediator it will be A) cheaper, B) satisfactory to both parties, since it is a NEGOTIATED settlement, and C) you might actually find out why he did what he did, because hearing each other out is part of the mediation process.
There are mediators in Park Slope, if you need a referral, please post again.
Posted by: one2one at July 23, 2009 9:02 AM
most E&O insurance policies have a $10k, $15k or $25k deductibles. you can probably negotiate with him to reduce fees or refund some of the money in lieu of pursuing via means of insurance. His policy premium will go way up at renewal (or he will be dropped) and you might be able to use this as leverage for him to settle with you outside of involvement of insurance co.
also, you should have a builders risk policy endorsement, under your homeowners policy for the duration of the project until such time that you get the final C of O... You can speak to your broker about this. If you have the endorsement then you can claim the losses, where they will pay you, and then fight on your behalf. This is called subrogation, its easy for you (the lossee party), but long, timely and costly for all the other parties - but hey inst that why you have insurance?
Designer and Architect here with much experience in E&O issues. If you want any consulting on this matter please do not hesitate to let me know.
Regards,
Alan Barr, founder
GOWANUS DESIGNinitiative
917.749.0119
gowanus.design@gmail.com
Posted by: Gowanus Design Initiative at July 25, 2009 10:39 AM
you know what they say about being smart, right? the smarter you are the more likely you'll estimate what you don't know but the dumber you are, the smarter you think you are. well, our architect thinks he's a genius. that's why i call him a 10 gallon hat with a 1 oz. brain. i'll take a referral for a mediator ... tx / iddelz
Posted by: iddelz at July 27, 2009 11:07 PM
If it's a standard AIA contract, you are bound to arbitration and mediation by the State of New York. Of course you can try to sue, but the architect can get an indefinite "stay" to that court case by filing in the arbitration and mediation court. The lawsuit will have to await the pending arbitration, at which point it would be pointless to continue with the suit. No one really wins in arbitration. I would recommend you just be up front with your architect and see if he would split the cost with you. He already acknowledged an overdesign on his part.
However, I don't think your architect necessary something as woefully wrong as you're implying. You want to take up litigation because the guy was overly concerned for your or the public's safety and it cost you more money than it should have? If you are paying him hourly, just tell him to give you the hours he spent on that portion of the project and tell him you're not paying for that.
Posted by: spanishfish at August 13, 2009 8:32 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.