I have been working with a 501(c)3 for over 10 years and am currently working on designs for a major expansion of their facility. After nearly 3 years (they don't have the money to build the project yet), we are close to having an approved set of schematic design drawings. The owner met with me yesterday to inform me that the GC has offered to complete the architectural drawings, based on our schematic design, "for free". The GC is not a licensed Architect and they typically use another architectural firm to design and seal their projects. We have offered dramitically reduced fee to this owner but I can't compete with "free". In fact, I doubt that these are free architectural services and that the GC my just bury the cost in OH or some other line item. I am looking for a hold harmless agreement that will protect my firm from any issues after we hand off the project. Always remember "no good deed goes unpunished".
Depends on the contract. Most contracts will have something saying the OP needs to provide a copy of the SD drawings when the phase is completed. Other than that the OP owes the client nothing else.
Dec 4, 24 5:04 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
That's likely true, but what I meant are the work files, not the deliverables.
I'm not lawyer enough to counsel you on a hold harmless, but I know you could easily do a limitation of liability, as in they agree that the max they could ever sue you for is $500.00 or something. You would probably want that from both the client and their GC. I think at the end of the day, the GC's architect taking over for you will bear the biggest responsibility and be the most juicy target for any claims.
A quick call to your insurance agent may give you some insights on how to proceed. Hopefully you don't have to pay an attorney to help you out of this.
Very few design clients out there will f*ck you over like a non-profit. Ask me how I know!
Only as long as the judicial court of jurisdiction permits or allows for limitation of liability. Some courts do in fact prohibit and deem those clauses unenforceable. Confirm with an attorney. In cases, licensed professionals are not allowed to contractually limit their professional liability from their own actions. In some cases, it doesn't matter if licensed or not because such things are seen as simply trying to induce consumers into waiving their legal rights in order for the professional to escape responsibility for his or her actions. Some courts looks down on that very much so so much so that they deem any such terms as unconscionable that it is outright forbidden like the hold harmless clause so do in fact verify with a qualified lawyer.
Drawings are instruments of service, and your copyright, so I would recommend you do what's in your power not to release them or warn the GC of their use without your consent. Maybe offer them a small fee you are happy with in addition with a hold harmless letter. This way you walk away from what sounds like a bad client and GC and at least you got a small fee for it.
Dec 4, 24 3:45 pm ·
·
OddArchitect
Yes and no. In most contracts the architect has to provide drawings associated with the associated phase. In this case SD's. Other than that the OP owes the client nothing else.
If the owner wants to end the contract prior to the completion of SD's then the OP only owes them what's been done thus far. This wouldn't exceed what was agreed upon in a SD package.
Typically you will need to provide the owner with a copy of the drawings for SD. This only has to be a PDF or paper copy. All depends on your contract.
If the client terminates the contract prior to the completion of SD's then the OP should only be required to provide what's been done thus far. This wouldn't exceed what was agreed upon in the SD package.
Assuming your SD drawings are labeled as such, and marked 'not for construction' you should be fine liability wise. Regardless, I agree with you approach to have the owner sign a letter of indemnification.
It sounds like the OP's client is foolish.
Gook luck!
Dec 4, 24 5:03 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
I would also suggest that scans of drawings vs actual pdfs of the digital.
Somehow I just find it unrealistic that a professional can be held liable for the subsequent construction of a schematic plan set...
[assumptions being that a "standard" contract is in place and that the docs indicate what phase they represent]
Don't be a tit and make heartache for this owner. Have them remember you as the pro that does the right thing, not some whiny spoilsport who moans about lost revenue and exposure. They will come back when they realize that the "free" service really wasn't and the work is not as high of quality. Maybe not this project...but maybe for the next one
i'll add that i'm sorry you're dealing with this -- that does suck
GC has offered to complete the architectural work "for free".
I have been working with a 501(c)3 for over 10 years and am currently working on designs for a major expansion of their facility. After nearly 3 years (they don't have the money to build the project yet), we are close to having an approved set of schematic design drawings. The owner met with me yesterday to inform me that the GC has offered to complete the architectural drawings, based on our schematic design, "for free". The GC is not a licensed Architect and they typically use another architectural firm to design and seal their projects. We have offered dramitically reduced fee to this owner but I can't compete with "free". In fact, I doubt that these are free architectural services and that the GC my just bury the cost in OH or some other line item. I am looking for a hold harmless agreement that will protect my firm from any issues after we hand off the project. Always remember "no good deed goes unpunished".
Don't release any drawings. Good deeds need payment in full.
Depends on the contract. Most contracts will have something saying the OP needs to provide a copy of the SD drawings when the phase is completed. Other than that the OP owes the client nothing else.
That's likely true, but what I meant are the work files, not the deliverables.
I'm not lawyer enough to counsel you on a hold harmless, but I know you could easily do a limitation of liability, as in they agree that the max they could ever sue you for is $500.00 or something. You would probably want that from both the client and their GC. I think at the end of the day, the GC's architect taking over for you will bear the biggest responsibility and be the most juicy target for any claims.
A quick call to your insurance agent may give you some insights on how to proceed. Hopefully you don't have to pay an attorney to help you out of this.
Very few design clients out there will f*ck you over like a non-profit. Ask me how I know!
Only as long as the judicial court of jurisdiction permits or allows for limitation of liability. Some courts do in fact prohibit and deem those clauses unenforceable. Confirm with an attorney. In cases, licensed professionals are not allowed to contractually limit their professional liability from their own actions. In some cases, it doesn't matter if licensed or not because such things are seen as simply trying to induce consumers into waiving their legal rights in order for the professional to escape responsibility for his or her actions. Some courts looks down on that very much so so much so that they deem any such terms as unconscionable that it is outright forbidden like the hold harmless clause so do in fact verify with a qualified lawyer.
Drawings are instruments of service, and your copyright, so I would recommend you do what's in your power not to release them or warn the GC of their use without your consent. Maybe offer them a small fee you are happy with in addition with a hold harmless letter. This way you walk away from what sounds like a bad client and GC and at least you got a small fee for it.
Yes and no. In most contracts the architect has to provide drawings associated with the associated phase. In this case SD's. Other than that the OP owes the client nothing else.
If the owner wants to end the contract prior to the completion of SD's then the OP only owes them what's been done thus far. This wouldn't exceed what was agreed upon in a SD package.
It all depends on how your contract is written.
Typically you will need to provide the owner with a copy of the drawings for SD. This only has to be a PDF or paper copy. All depends on your contract.
If the client terminates the contract prior to the completion of SD's then the OP should only be required to provide what's been done thus far. This wouldn't exceed what was agreed upon in the SD package.
Assuming your SD drawings are labeled as such, and marked 'not for construction' you should be fine liability wise. Regardless, I agree with you approach to have the owner sign a letter of indemnification.
It sounds like the OP's client is foolish.
Gook luck!
I would also suggest that scans of drawings vs actual pdfs of the digital.
Somehow I just find it unrealistic that a professional can be held liable for the subsequent construction of a schematic plan set...
[assumptions being that a "standard" contract is in place and that the docs indicate what phase they represent]
Don't be a tit and make heartache for this owner. Have them remember you as the pro that does the right thing, not some whiny spoilsport who moans about lost revenue and exposure. They will come back when they realize that the "free" service really wasn't and the work is not as high of quality. Maybe not this project...but maybe for the next one
i'll add that i'm sorry you're dealing with this -- that does suck
You find it unrealistic because in most situations they cannot be liable.
Sadly courts have not been in our favor lately with these things.
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.