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…
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.
I think this is a typical mistake by the consumer expecting technical expertise from an industry that prides itself on never getting their hands dirty. The reality is “It’s not architecture until it’s built” and the majority of architects have never built anything. Clearly had the architect consulted with the building department like builders/contractors do, we would not be having this discussion.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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.
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.
^you can put