Ownership of plans

onlyroz

We currently have a planning application submitted for an extension. The plans were drawn up by a company that specialises in extensions and we paid them £1500 as a deposit to cover the cost of drawing up the plans. However, we have been generally unhappy with the company largely due to long delays, lack of communication and contradictory information over various aspects of the project.

If we obtain planning permission we are seriously considering taking the plans to a different company and asking them to do the work instead. However, our contract with the first company says that they own the plans and we would have to pay them the full amount for the extension if we got a different company to do the work. Is such a clause enforceable? And if so would it be sufficient to slightly change the plans e.g. by moving some doorways around etc and saying that the plans we used are different? And how would any such minor changes to the plans affect the validity of the planning approval?

Thanks in advance.

anotherbaldrick

Are you hoping to get your £1500 deposit back ?

mymedi

You're stuck and quite seriously too.

Existing architectural contracts are drawn up by the architects and protect almost exclusively the architect, not the client. Your firm is correct that they own the plans and are due fees on any work done from these plans... Yes, even though you paid for them. And yes, they will keep owning the plans even after the construction is finished - so you cannot build another one somewhere else!

onlyroz wrote: »

If we obtain planning permission we are seriously considering taking the plans to a different company and asking them to do the work instead.

You cannot do that, and the other company should know that too since they too could get sued.

onlyroz wrote: »

And if so would it be sufficient to slightly change the plans e.g. by moving some doorways around etc and saying that the plans we used are different?

This is complicated. Just moving doors around - no. But the architect owns only the ACTUAL PLANS they've drawn up. Meaning that if another architect were to draw up the same plans from scratch and conversations with you, those would be DIFFERENT plans and you could then use them. The caveat being that if there are any design or structural aspects that were done or proposed by the first firm (unless these are common practice), you cannot use those without their permission.

onlyroz wrote: »

And how would any such minor changes to the plans affect the validity of the planning approval?

The planning application would probably need to be reviewed given that you would have different plans by a different architect. However, I think (not sure) this can be done as a revision rather than a full resubmission.

My advice - go to another architect, DO NOT show them your existing plans and discuss your situation with them - they'd be much more qualified to advise...
Good luck.

mymedi

onlyroz wrote: »

and we would have to pay them the full amount for the extension if we got a different company to do the work. Is such a clause enforceable?

I missed this before - no, this is not enforceable. They cannot require you to pay them the full sum of the building contract. It will usually be a certain percentage (10-15% usually) of the total construction cost. Even if the contract explicitly says "full amount", I very much doubt it will be enforceable in court.
What type of contract is this, by the way?

onlyroz

anotherbaldrick wrote: »

Are you hoping to get your £1500 deposit back ?

No, I don't expect to get the deposit back. The deposit is "a contribution towards the cost of drawing up the plans", which we have and are happy to pay for - but we have serious questions about the capability of this company to manage a large project given the incompetence they have demonstrated so far.

onlyroz

mymedi wrote: »

The planning application would probably need to be reviewed given that you would have different plans by a different architect. However, I think (not sure) this can be done as a revision rather than a full resubmission.

My advice - go to another architect, DO NOT show them your existing plans and discuss your situation with them - they'd be much more qualified to advise...
Good luck.

What steps do planning departments take to ensure that the actual construction matches the plans? And how would they tell that different plans were used if the resulting structure is broadly the same?

I think I'll approach a few other companies and ask them for advice. I'd rather not have wasted the £1500, or the money paid for the planning application if at all possible.

onlyroz

mymedi wrote: »

I missed this before - no, this is not enforceable. They cannot require you to pay them the full sum of the building contract. It will usually be a certain percentage (10-15% usually) of the total construction cost. Even if the contract explicitly says "full amount", I very much doubt it will be enforceable in court.
What type of contract is this, by the way?

I'm not sure what "type" of contract it is - I'll have another look at it tonight. I'd rather not go into specific details on the project because I don't want the company to be able to identify me.

mymedi

What I mean by "type of contract" is whether it's a design and build contract with a builder, or an architectural contract for the plans, of a homeowner's contract, etc.
Also, you need to check for yourself whether the contract states anything about the money besides the plans ownership - are there any damages, any fees/costs due in the event of termination, etc.

mymedi

onlyroz wrote: »

What steps do planning departments take to ensure that the actual construction matches the plans? And how would they tell that different plans were used if the resulting structure is broadly the same?

That would largely depend on your appointed inspection officer.
Usually, there should be a building warrant inspection prior to construction and then after completion. What they look at and whether they even do the inspection is totally up to them...

onlyroz

mymedi wrote: »

What I mean by "type of contract" is whether it's a design and build contract with a builder, or an architectural contract for the plans, of a homeowner's contract, etc.
Also, you need to check for yourself whether the contract states anything about the money besides the plans ownership - are there any damages, any fees/costs due in the event of termination, etc.

I think it's a design and build contract. The intention was that this company would manage the project from start to finish.

I have looked in the contract about terminating it early and (beyond the 7-day cooling off period) it doesn't seem to mention anything about extra costs if the customer terminates early. It does state that *they* can terminate the contract if they wish, and that they will charge us for any work done up until that point.

vaio

onlyroz wrote: »

I think it's a design and build contract. The intention was that this company would manage the project from start to finish.

I have looked in the contract about terminating it early and (beyond the 7-day cooling off period) it doesn't seem to mention anything about extra costs if the customer terminates early. It does state that *they* can terminate the contract if they wish, and that they will charge us for any work done up until that point.

Depends on the contract but I'd say the same will apply if you terminate, you'd have to pay for work done so far so if drawing the plans have absorbed £2k in time then you'd have to give them the extra £500.

Obviously this wouldn't apply if you had a "valid" contractual reason for terminating when the normal contractual rules would apply including consequential costs but that can easily get very messy and expensive.