Architect - should she have checked utilities before designing?

Annie1960

the_r_sole wrote: »

What exactly would contacting RIBA do here?
Something like this really isn't within their remit whatsoever!!

It seems this is now the remit of arb.


http://www.arb.org.uk/concerns-about-an-architect

System

Annie1960 wrote: »

It seems this is now the remit of arb.


http://www.arb.org.uk/concerns-about-an-architect

It's really not a code of conduct issue so what do you think the ARB of RIBA would do here?

The only thing that defines the scope of service is the appointment document which is between the architect and employer. RIBA/ARB wouldn't have anything to say unless the appointment document doesn't comply with their requirements.

It's not the role of these bodies to say what or what isn't in the scope of services.

Robin9

If the main cable is in the public footpath - it doesn't matter where it actually is or how deep it is. Other than digging up the footpath no research by your architect would reveal the precise detail.

Why is it in the way ?

Annie1960

the_r_sole wrote: »

It's really not a code of conduct issue so what do you think the ARB of RIBA would do here?

The only thing that defines the scope of service is the appointment document which is between the architect and employer. RIBA/ARB wouldn't have anything to say unless the appointment document doesn't comply with their requirements.

It's not the role of these bodies to say what or what isn't in the scope of services.

The question is whether or not the architect should have checked utilities before designing. It is therefore about the competence of the architect. This is what I would check out if I were in this position, and it's up to the OP whether or not they wish to pursue this.

System

Annie1960 wrote: »

The question is whether or not the architect should have checked utilities before designing. It is therefore about the competence of the architect. This is what I would check out if I were in this position, and it's up to the OP whether or not they wish to pursue this.

That is not about competence - it is about what is defined in their appointment and whether this kind of survey is defined in the scope of services.
ARB would check to see what form of appointment has been used and what services are defined in the appointment - that is all they can do. They couldn't say that additional surveys should have been carried out if they are not detailed in an appointment.
(there are checkboxes in the standard forms for additional surveys and also further areas where additional services can be detailed)
With a standard appointment it is usually the clients responsibility to provide site information

Annie1960

the_r_sole wrote: »

That is not about competence - it is about what is defined in their appointment and whether this kind of survey is defined in the scope of services.
ARB would check to see what form of appointment has been used and what services are defined in the appointment - that is all they can do. They couldn't say that additional surveys should have been carried out if they are not detailed in an appointment.
(there are checkboxes in the standard forms for additional surveys and also further areas where additional services can be detailed)
With a standard appointment it is usually the clients responsibility to provide site information

Where is your evidence for your assertions? Are you a qualified architect? As a customer, if I were in the same position as the OP, I would want to ring the arb for an informal chat. Perhaps they will confirm what you say, in which case the OP will have a clear answer to their question.

System

Annie1960 wrote: »

Are you a qualified architect?

:money: ...

brightontraveller

Annie1960 wrote: »

Where is your evidence for your assertions? Are you a qualified architect? As a customer, if I were in the same position as the OP, I would want to ring the arb for an informal chat. Perhaps they will confirm what you say, in which case the OP will have a clear answer to their question.

What are you arguing competency, negligence? What should be included in contract but isn’t ? a fools path ?

AnnieMary

Thanks all - definitely some good points to think about.


The electric cable runs about two metres away from the original front door (we've come out a little at the front too per the architect's design). It was originally below the front lawn - we're on a hill and the cable would have been about 3/4 metre down but the plans were to lower the level for a flatter driveway to accommodate parking for the number of cars the planning dept specifies for a 4 bed.


I'll have to face digging out the contract and find out where we stand. It is completely our responsibility to check what we were contracting the architect to do, but after all the talk and agreement about the project management at the time I think we did just assume she included it in stead of triple checking. Clearly we aren't lawyers. She hasn't charged us - but we were expecting her to later.


We are learning a lot from this whole experience. But it is useless information because we are sure as heck NEVER doing this again. It is utterly horrible.

bgm_co

Doozergirl wrote: »

If someone is project managing, you'd notice the bill, no? You'd notice my bill!

Completely. Surely it would be in the contract too.