Owner of the property sold the land along with the design to another buyer. The buyer wants to retain my architectural services to make some changes to the design and go into plan check.
Is this allowed?
Basically, I am stuck with a new client that I didn't even choose myself. Because I am invested in this project I now need to enter into a contract with a person who may potentially be difficult to work with.
I can't seem to find in the AiA contracts that the contract is not transferable.
Why I find this objectionable is because choosing client well is vitally important so that a business can stay financially afloat with minimal problems. If the client is difficult there may be potential lawsuits, etc. Also, the kind of client an architect looks for is crucial for future referrals.
What can I write into the contract to prevent an owner /developer to who hired me to be their architect then sold the land and me to a bad client?
What kind of protections do I have?
Can the new owner just hire another architect to finish the job?
You dont get to choose your client, unless you are a trust fund baby. If you are indeed a trust fund baby/independently wealthy, why are you concerned?
Jokes apart, such situations happen all the time, especially on large projects. Most times it doesn't end well for the architect, as the new owner has his/her own ideas. So, if they retain you, get the job done and get out.
Having an occasional turd for a patient/client/customer is part of any professional's life. How do you know this new client would be a problem? Meet with them and find out something about them. You may be pleasantly surprised.
quizzical is right. Payment is key. No firm is financially viable if you don't get paid, even if the client is a saint and has perfect taste in alignment with your own.
Had a new owner come in part way through a project with the existing owner still being property manager for a few years. Juggling two clients was a bit rough and contradictory at times. It seems like as long as you're getting paid, roll with it.
Is the first client trying to transfer/assign the contract to the second? Or is the first terminating their contract with you and the second is trying to start a new contract with you?
Both situations are handled in standard AIA contracts. See B101 articles 9 and 10.
The original contract was between you and the original client. You do not have a contract with the new owner. Just treat it like a new project and form a new contract. Not sure why you feel trapped?
What does your contract say? Assignment allowed? Assignment allowed with consent? Assignment not allowed? Seems like a huge mistake if the AIA docs don't address assignment. Could go both ways. Let's say a developer hires you and you assign the entire contract to another firm. Is he getting what he paid for? This is an interesting situation. I see developers raising the price all the time on property where they have "plans and entitlement in place." Essentially shovel ready. They're paying for a complete design and then marking it up and reselling it. Does this cross the line on the copywrite issue? I wonder how many add this to the design contract or simply do it? Sorry no formatting on my phone.
Has anyone ever read an AIA contract? AIA B101 10.3, "[...] Neither the Owner nor the Architect shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other, [...]"
Apr 3, 17 11:04 am ·
·
wurdan freo
Yes, but it's been years. I think I've been fairly open on here that I'm a recovering architect and licensed contractor. I don't use the AIA docs. AIA is way to biased in favor of the archie :) Not to mention that any clause in the contract can be struck from the document. If the OP noted that he couldn't find such a clause... maybe it was... although it was my understanding that all clauses should be struck through and not removed.
Don't you just love it when somebody posts a question here, gets 13 responses -- many trying to be helpful but asking for more information -- and the OP has just disappeared w/o a trace ?
No one has even touched on the copyright issues involved with the original owner selling the design to the buyer of the property. Yes, that's covered in a standard AIA contract too.
Apr 3, 17 5:45 pm ·
·
x-jla
Good point. Thats a sticky one though. the original owner essentially owns the plans and can likely legally sell/transfer them without violating any copyright. Basically it would be the same as selling a painting that you comissioned from an artist. You are not making a copy, you are selling it. Maybe im wrong?
Apr 3, 17 7:32 pm ·
·
Jeremy
not true, typically the owner only has right to use the instruments of service to build a project, they do not own them or the design, nor can they sell it. However the contract may have been written so they do own it, and some clients ask for that.
Jeremy's response is more in line with my understanding. The architect grants a license to use the instruments of service to the owner. The owner cannot transfer it without written consent of the architect.
AIA B101 7.4 "[...] The Owner shall not assign, delegate, sublicense, pledge or otherwise transfer any license granted herein to another party without the prior written agreement of the Architect. [...]"
there are things in our contracts we should be reading?
What a perfect example of why architects are notoriously poor at business. Even if most of the people above are students there is an attitude to business and the machinery of business in our profession that runs deep. We are willfully lost in the wilderness.
^ So true. The attitude starts in school with professors who teach because the grubby world of commerce is beneath them, continues with internships that exploit rather than prepare, and a professional leadership class that is too wrapped up in its own wonderfulness to care about the long term viability of our trade.
Owner of the property sold the lot along with the design to another person
Owner of the property sold the land along with the design to another buyer. The buyer wants to retain my architectural services to make some changes to the design and go into plan check.
Is this allowed?
Basically, I am stuck with a new client that I didn't even choose myself. Because I am invested in this project I now need to enter into a contract with a person who may potentially be difficult to work with.
I can't seem to find in the AiA contracts that the contract is not transferable.
Why I find this objectionable is because choosing client well is vitally important so that a business can stay financially afloat with minimal problems. If the client is difficult there may be potential lawsuits, etc. Also, the kind of client an architect looks for is crucial for future referrals.
What can I write into the contract to prevent an owner /developer to who hired me to be their architect then sold the land and me to a bad client?
What kind of protections do I have?
Can the new owner just hire another architect to finish the job?
You dont get to choose your client, unless you are a trust fund baby. If you are indeed a trust fund baby/independently wealthy, why are you concerned?
Jokes apart, such situations happen all the time, especially on large projects. Most times it doesn't end well for the architect, as the new owner has his/her own ideas. So, if they retain you, get the job done and get out.
Key question: have you been paid in full for your work to date ?
Having an occasional turd for a patient/client/customer is part of any professional's life. How do you know this new client would be a problem? Meet with them and find out something about them. You may be pleasantly surprised.
quizzical is right. Payment is key. No firm is financially viable if you don't get paid, even if the client is a saint and has perfect taste in alignment with your own.
Both situations are handled in standard AIA contracts. See B101 articles 9 and 10.
The original contract was between you and the original client. You do not have a contract with the new owner. Just treat it like a new project and form a new contract. Not sure why you feel trapped?
Contracts are between people not between people and land.
+1 to both Everyday Intern & jla-x
new contract is required; otherwise you have no obligation to this new character
What does your contract say? Assignment allowed? Assignment allowed with consent? Assignment not allowed? Seems like a huge mistake if the AIA docs don't address assignment. Could go both ways. Let's say a developer hires you and you assign the entire contract to another firm. Is he getting what he paid for? This is an interesting situation. I see developers raising the price all the time on property where they have "plans and entitlement in place." Essentially shovel ready. They're paying for a complete design and then marking it up and reselling it. Does this cross the line on the copywrite issue? I wonder how many add this to the design contract or simply do it? Sorry no formatting on my phone.
Has anyone ever read an AIA contract? AIA B101 10.3, "[...] Neither the Owner nor the Architect shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other, [...]"
Yes, but it's been years. I think I've been fairly open on here that I'm a recovering architect and licensed contractor. I don't use the AIA docs. AIA is way to biased in favor of the archie :) Not to mention that any clause in the contract can be struck from the document. If the OP noted that he couldn't find such a clause... maybe it was... although it was my understanding that all clauses should be struck through and not removed.
One other question. Was the contract completed? Very different scenario if the contract was completed versus in the middle of services.
Payment is being key. As is not being a dick about it (like a lot of unsuccessful architects)
Don't you just love it when somebody posts a question here, gets 13 responses -- many trying to be helpful but asking for more information -- and the OP has just disappeared w/o a trace ?
No one has even touched on the copyright issues involved with the original owner selling the design to the buyer of the property. Yes, that's covered in a standard AIA contract too.
Good point. Thats a sticky one though. the original owner essentially owns the plans and can likely legally sell/transfer them without violating any copyright. Basically it would be the same as selling a painting that you comissioned from an artist. You are not making a copy, you are selling it. Maybe im wrong?
not true, typically the owner only has right to use the instruments of service to build a project, they do not own them or the design, nor can they sell it. However the contract may have been written so they do own it, and some clients ask for that.
Jeremy's response is more in line with my understanding. The architect grants a license to use the instruments of service to the owner. The owner cannot transfer it without written consent of the architect.
AIA B101 7.4 "[...] The Owner shall not assign, delegate, sublicense, pledge or otherwise transfer any license granted herein to another party without the prior written agreement of the Architect. [...]"
there are things in our contracts we should be reading?
What a perfect example of why architects are notoriously poor at business. Even if most of the people above are students there is an attitude to business and the machinery of business in our profession that runs deep. We are willfully lost in the wilderness.
^ So true. The attitude starts in school with professors who teach because the grubby world of commerce is beneath them, continues with internships that exploit rather than prepare, and a professional leadership class that is too wrapped up in its own wonderfulness to care about the long term viability of our trade.
Has the project gone though site plan approval and permitting? Makes a big difference
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.