How do you get a termination letter from Client to Architect
Everyday Intern
Nov 23, 16 12:04 pm
email? postal service? bike messenger?
CathyV1718
Nov 23, 16 12:13 pm
I'm sorry I meant is there a specific form that I would have to fill out and if there is one where would I be able to obtain one.
Thanks in advance.
Josh Mings
Nov 23, 16 12:16 pm
If you are preparing to send a termination letter to your architect, I suggest you get a lawyer because it could get ugly. I would suggest your lawyer review the contract you signed with the architect for any specific language regarding termination of contract and terms involved and then have the lawyer send the letter on your behalf.
proto
Nov 23, 16 12:17 pm
just write the letter and reference the date & contract & reason for termination. keep it brief. expect a final invoice for work done.
(if it's contentious, lawyer up and expect to pay for quality services)
CathyV1718
Nov 23, 16 12:31 pm
It isn't contentious, the architect does not have time for this project anymore. when I asked a lawyer about this he said he doesn't know any specific language for a release from architects. But I heard there is a specific language - something stating he is no longer the architect of record, and also releasing the copyrights for whatever he already did.
Everyday Intern
Nov 23, 16 12:49 pm
Yeah, I'd follow Josh's advice and review the agreement you have with your Architect. It will explain when and why you can terminate the agreement. It will probably also address copyrights for their work ... which normally are the property of the Architect. You may be granted a nonexclusive license to use the instruments of service for constructing your project. But all of that would already be agreed to in the contract. There is no specific language to terminate the contract except, "I'm terminating our agreement."
Bench
Nov 23, 16 12:50 pm
and also releasing the copyrights for whatever he already did.
Oy vey. You definitely want a lawyer now.
chigurh
Nov 23, 16 12:52 pm
about 99% of the time you can just let them know and walk away - don't be a dick, make sure you pay for all services rendered to date. I doubt your architect is going to fight to keep you as a client through legal process. ha!
I'm sure there is a clause in the contact that explains the termination process - just double check - a letter, 30 days, pay invoices.
senjohnblutarsky
Nov 23, 16 12:54 pm
Might be easier to ask the Architect if they'd like to terminate the contract and turn over work that has been paid for. If they don't, then terminate for cause.
CathyV1718
Nov 23, 16 12:56 pm
Unfortunately there was no contract. It was a hand-shake deal (foolish, I now know). No invoices either.
Everyday Intern
Nov 23, 16 12:58 pm
But now you want it in writing!?
Everyday Intern
Nov 23, 16 1:01 pm
Probably the simplest thing at this point would be to sit down with your architect, work something out, shake on it, then write it all down and sign it.
Next time, get an agreement signed before you let the architect start work.
Donna Sink
Nov 23, 16 1:02 pm
If the architect drew anything for you in any medium, s/he retains the copyright to that work unless s/he explicitly releases it to you to use. This is long-standing in copyright law.
awaiting_deletion
Nov 23, 16 1:16 pm
ask the architect if they care about "copyrights" . do not know what kind of project it is but a good chance they will not care.
mightyaa
Nov 23, 16 3:02 pm
If it was a standard AIA based contract, there will be some terms in there you should be aware of.
Some leave in the ability to bill for anticipated profit for termination. Some maintain ownership of the documents. Some allow for 15 days to close out the project (and being able to bill for that time).
So, you might just start with a face to face meeting for the termination and find out how they want to handle the final bill and turnover of work to date. Then follow up with a letter summarizing the agreement. You'll also get a good feeling for whether or not it will be contentious.
I've been more or less terminated a couple times under that same sort of non-performance due to scheduling issues. Normally, I went above and beyond to help the owner transition to a architect who could handle the project... I'd toss the electronic drawings, a meeting with the replacement to cover where we left off, etc. Basically the guilt of letting the client down and I just believe in doing the right thing. Your architect might be the same.
mightyaa
Nov 23, 16 3:19 pm
If the architect drew anything for you in any medium, s/he retains the copyright to that work unless s/he explicitly releases it to you to use. This is long-standing in copyright law.
Not true. The copyright laws protect the work from being 'copied': They aren't allowed to use it on other projects. They can use it if they paid you for the work to continue or modify the same project. Denial of allowing them access to the work they paid for could result in a large liability for the architect.
Everyday Intern
Nov 23, 16 7:24 pm
mightyaa and Donna are both correct. However, it is important to not confuse ownership of a copyright with a license to use the instruments of service. In standard contracts (and copyright law), the architect generally retains ownership of the copyright and issues a license (typically nonexclusive) to the owner to use the instruments of service (drawings, specs, etc.) to build, use, and maintain the project.
If a contract is terminated there are various options in standard agreements that lay out how to proceed with regard to licensing the use of the instruments of service. This could be that the client maintains a license to use the instruments of service per the original agreement including indemnification of the architect and their consultants to any resultant claims from their use of the instruments of service, the license to use the instruments of service is terminated along with the contract, or the client pays a fee to license the use of the instruments of service also with indemnification.
The end result is usually a matter of who terminated the agreement (client or architect), and for what reason (convenience or cause). Generally, how mightyaa outlines is correct ... if the architect is paid for their work and the client terminates for cause, the client will retain a license to use the instruments of service. If the client terminates for convenience, at least in AIA B101, it points to the client needing to pay a licensing fee to the architect in order to use the instruments of service.
As Donna mentions though, unless there is something agreed upon that states contrary, the architect will generally retain the copyright to their work. In this case without a written agreement between the OP and their architect, it's anybody's guess (or anybody's word) as to what the intention of the original agreement was concerning licensing the use of the instruments of service in the case of termination of the contract. I think a good place to start the conversation would be with what AIA B101 states, or a similar contract, and negotiate from there.
It is also hard to determine what constitutes termination for cause or convenience when there is no written agreement. The OP mentioned that the architect does not have the time to do the work, but are they in breach of contract? Have they missed a deadline (that wasn't ever established)? Have they not performed their duties under the agreement (that are not established) with a reasonable standard of care? Are they not representing the client appropriately on the job site by not attending regular meetings (the regularity or number of which was never established)? What happens if the OP and the architect can't come to an agreement--mediation, binding arbitration, trial by jury--when there is no agreement which would outline an agreed upon way to handle claims or disputes?
[TV announcer voice] And that, kids, is why you always get a signed, written agreement before you start work ...
senjohnblutarsky
Nov 24, 16 8:03 am
Actually, mighty isn't totally correct. I know of a lawsuit where the architect was hired to finish out a job. Owner brought designs to them, which were modified and developed into cd's. architect was sued by previous architect for use of their design. Previous architect won.
The previous architect had been paid. I never got details on release of copyright, but I would assume it was contentious.
My advice to the OP is to have all the details of the break up in writing. You have failed to do that so far. But, it is time to start protecting everyone involved. The failure, here, isn't just with the architect.
How do you get a termination letter from Client to Architect
email? postal service? bike messenger?
I'm sorry I meant is there a specific form that I would have to fill out and if there is one where would I be able to obtain one.
Thanks in advance.
If you are preparing to send a termination letter to your architect, I suggest you get a lawyer because it could get ugly. I would suggest your lawyer review the contract you signed with the architect for any specific language regarding termination of contract and terms involved and then have the lawyer send the letter on your behalf.
just write the letter and reference the date & contract & reason for termination. keep it brief. expect a final invoice for work done.
(if it's contentious, lawyer up and expect to pay for quality services)
It isn't contentious, the architect does not have time for this project anymore. when I asked a lawyer about this he said he doesn't know any specific language for a release from architects. But I heard there is a specific language - something stating he is no longer the architect of record, and also releasing the copyrights for whatever he already did.
Yeah, I'd follow Josh's advice and review the agreement you have with your Architect. It will explain when and why you can terminate the agreement. It will probably also address copyrights for their work ... which normally are the property of the Architect. You may be granted a nonexclusive license to use the instruments of service for constructing your project. But all of that would already be agreed to in the contract. There is no specific language to terminate the contract except, "I'm terminating our agreement."
and also releasing the copyrights for whatever he already did.
Oy vey. You definitely want a lawyer now.
about 99% of the time you can just let them know and walk away - don't be a dick, make sure you pay for all services rendered to date. I doubt your architect is going to fight to keep you as a client through legal process. ha!
I'm sure there is a clause in the contact that explains the termination process - just double check - a letter, 30 days, pay invoices.
Might be easier to ask the Architect if they'd like to terminate the contract and turn over work that has been paid for. If they don't, then terminate for cause.
Unfortunately there was no contract.
It was a hand-shake deal (foolish, I now know). No invoices either.
But now you want it in writing!?
Probably the simplest thing at this point would be to sit down with your architect, work something out, shake on it, then write it all down and sign it.
Next time, get an agreement signed before you let the architect start work.
If the architect drew anything for you in any medium, s/he retains the copyright to that work unless s/he explicitly releases it to you to use. This is long-standing in copyright law.
ask the architect if they care about "copyrights" . do not know what kind of project it is but a good chance they will not care.
If it was a standard AIA based contract, there will be some terms in there you should be aware of.
Some leave in the ability to bill for anticipated profit for termination. Some maintain ownership of the documents. Some allow for 15 days to close out the project (and being able to bill for that time).
So, you might just start with a face to face meeting for the termination and find out how they want to handle the final bill and turnover of work to date. Then follow up with a letter summarizing the agreement. You'll also get a good feeling for whether or not it will be contentious.
I've been more or less terminated a couple times under that same sort of non-performance due to scheduling issues. Normally, I went above and beyond to help the owner transition to a architect who could handle the project... I'd toss the electronic drawings, a meeting with the replacement to cover where we left off, etc. Basically the guilt of letting the client down and I just believe in doing the right thing. Your architect might be the same.
If the architect drew anything for you in any medium, s/he retains the copyright to that work unless s/he explicitly releases it to you to use. This is long-standing in copyright law.
Not true. The copyright laws protect the work from being 'copied': They aren't allowed to use it on other projects. They can use it if they paid you for the work to continue or modify the same project. Denial of allowing them access to the work they paid for could result in a large liability for the architect.
mightyaa and Donna are both correct. However, it is important to not confuse ownership of a copyright with a license to use the instruments of service. In standard contracts (and copyright law), the architect generally retains ownership of the copyright and issues a license (typically nonexclusive) to the owner to use the instruments of service (drawings, specs, etc.) to build, use, and maintain the project.
If a contract is terminated there are various options in standard agreements that lay out how to proceed with regard to licensing the use of the instruments of service. This could be that the client maintains a license to use the instruments of service per the original agreement including indemnification of the architect and their consultants to any resultant claims from their use of the instruments of service, the license to use the instruments of service is terminated along with the contract, or the client pays a fee to license the use of the instruments of service also with indemnification.
The end result is usually a matter of who terminated the agreement (client or architect), and for what reason (convenience or cause). Generally, how mightyaa outlines is correct ... if the architect is paid for their work and the client terminates for cause, the client will retain a license to use the instruments of service. If the client terminates for convenience, at least in AIA B101, it points to the client needing to pay a licensing fee to the architect in order to use the instruments of service.
As Donna mentions though, unless there is something agreed upon that states contrary, the architect will generally retain the copyright to their work. In this case without a written agreement between the OP and their architect, it's anybody's guess (or anybody's word) as to what the intention of the original agreement was concerning licensing the use of the instruments of service in the case of termination of the contract. I think a good place to start the conversation would be with what AIA B101 states, or a similar contract, and negotiate from there.
It is also hard to determine what constitutes termination for cause or convenience when there is no written agreement. The OP mentioned that the architect does not have the time to do the work, but are they in breach of contract? Have they missed a deadline (that wasn't ever established)? Have they not performed their duties under the agreement (that are not established) with a reasonable standard of care? Are they not representing the client appropriately on the job site by not attending regular meetings (the regularity or number of which was never established)? What happens if the OP and the architect can't come to an agreement--mediation, binding arbitration, trial by jury--when there is no agreement which would outline an agreed upon way to handle claims or disputes?
[TV announcer voice] And that, kids, is why you always get a signed, written agreement before you start work ...
Actually, mighty isn't totally correct. I know of a lawsuit where the architect was hired to finish out a job. Owner brought designs to them, which were modified and developed into cd's. architect was sued by previous architect for use of their design. Previous architect won.
The previous architect had been paid. I never got details on release of copyright, but I would assume it was contentious.
My advice to the OP is to have all the details of the break up in writing. You have failed to do that so far. But, it is time to start protecting everyone involved. The failure, here, isn't just with the architect.