Architect/Builder dispute - anyone help?

alumende27

Are we getting the full story here?

You tell us that "We're being asked to pay for some ridiculous things", and from your later responses:

One of those things is a £20 shower head, which you later admit is "petty".
You choose not to tell us why the contractor installed our floor incorrectly for reasons that you say are too long to explain, but you have the time to create an account here and write three followup posts.
You chose not to answer the question about How many weeks is " a bit tardy choosing the tiles"?

No one likes home truths, but are you sure it's the builder and architect that are the issue here? I've seen enough episodes of Grand Designs to know that the home owner is quite capable of causing delays and issues even if they don't see it themselves.

*The contractor installed our floor incorrectly for reasons that are too long for this post. I offered to contractor the chance to resolve it or remove it from the contract, and he chose to remove it. Now apparently I have now caused this delay by choosing the installer who was the first available to do the work, but because he is a registered installer (the builder wasn't) the Architect deems this a contract variation and therefore any delay caused is my fault. The Architect claims that I would not have allowed the builder to resolve the issue - even though I explicitly offered that option and have it written down and agreed that I said that by Architect. So written evidence counts for naught in his eyes.

So very unclear. Are you saying you chose a contractor to lay the flooring that wasn't the one that was agreed in the contract? What does the contract say, is the architect correct in saying your intervention caused the contract variation?

Anyway, back to the "We're being asked to pay for some ridiculous things", what is the difference between what you are being charged and what you think you owe?

steampowered

Just to add, before the Op considers potential breach of contract or negligence claims against the architect, the Op needs to be sure that he/she understands the contract with the builder.

If the Op has signed industry-standard construction contracts, the answer to many of the Op's queries will be in the contract.

Typically for building contracts, someone (such as an architect) is appointed as your representative to agree certain things with the builder on your behalf. A good contract would impose certain controls and limitations on the architect's authority. The Op needs to read this carefully to understand exactly what the architect is entitled to do, and how he can control the architect's decisions.

For example it is not necessarily the case that the architect is able to approve contract variations leading to authorised contractual delays (a contractual delay would mean that the builder is not liable for late fees), and if the architect can do this there would often be restrictions.

TED209

Thanks both.

@dsdhall, I think it is good to be sceptical here, but I actually meant that I thought it was being petty us being charged for an unwanted loan of a shower head. Small amount it may be, but I still don't expect to be charged for something I didn't ask for and was offered without mention of cost. The plumber simply said "I'll try a shower head I have on my van" and then when I tried to take it off, he simply said to leave it on for a bit.

Problem with the floor:

Originally specified by Architect as LVT with special underlay for uneven floors
Revised to different underlay after conversation with floor provider (underlay was for laminate not LVT)
However, should have been revised to plywood+underlay+LVT
Missing plywood meant bumpy floor
I requested it was fixed
Was advised that this would cost me £1000
I rejected that and called a meeting.
Contractor offered to leave floor installed at no charge
I said we didn't want a bumpy floor
I offered the contractor the opportunity to fix it or remove it from the contract.
He chose to remove it.
I obtained 2 quotes for installation from local installers.
One installer would reuse the floor but couldn't install until week running up to Christmas
Another wasn't willing to resume, but could do it 2 weeks before Christmas, so I chose him, although he was more expensive.

Architect is now saying that I caused the delay because I was insisting on an approved installer (not true) and therefore I caused overrun to project and not only do I lose late fees I now have to pay £1k to the builder because I caused the delay. And his argument for this is that I wouldn't have really wanted the contractor to fix it (even though I have an agreed written record of me offering this, and I would have been very happy had he just got on and fixed it).

Things I am being charged for:

Well, actually, it's more that several items have been REMOVED (I bought them direct myself) and these aren't being taken off the price.

So, we decided not to have 4 wall lights installed, and on top of that bought our outside lights ourselves and removed the need for 2 wall lights worth about £100 each to be bought by the builders. Net reduction? £0.

We were also quoted approx. £500 for some paving but this has transformed into £1400 without any explanation.

Terribly frustrating.

I'll have to look into this thing with the variation, but the Architect knows his stuff and I suspect I'll just have to swallow my pride and get on with life!

Ta

bris

Well no you don't, never trust anyone especially the architect who is in with the bricks (no pun intended) with the builder.
If you didn't cause the delay don't pay the 1k to the builder, simple as that, you can even counter claim for the late fees.
The contract you have is simply to complex for this forum as we can't see it and couldn't determine if it was fair or not. Get a specialist to look at it, you can't allow yourself to be held to ransom.


You need to detail everything you think they are overcharging you for and put all you doubts in writing to the architect for an explanation.


The only organisation that can really help you are the small claims court, if they are taking the !!!! they will find them out.

Shaka_Zulu

Surely you have a retention?

lush_walrus

An architect, if that is what you employed rather than a pseudo proclaiming technician or technologist or architectural designer, is a professional and is compulsory registered with ARB.

It is highly unlucky if an architect to act out of a relationship with a builder rather than in accordance with the contract as they are reportable to ARB which is publicised, can result in a large fine or struck off. It's the equivalent of the medical council but for architects.

In your contract with the architect there is an agreed process to go through to resolve the dispute, it will detail arbitration. Read your contact.

A lot of the advice you have been given is incorrect in process - small claims court is not the correct course of action. Read the contract then go through that process with them. If you need advice call ARB (architect registration board) they have a website and a line you can call for advice as a client.

Only other piece of advice is when you do call know what your scope of works is what your contract is and be equally prepared and professional- not many people will take a claim of £20 seriously in relation to a building contract.

hollydays

hollydays wrote: »

How many weeks is " a bit tardy choosing the tiles"?

You still didn't answer this.

TED209

2 weeks I think. Bit tricky to know as there was a lot going on.

bris

lush_walrus wrote: »

It is highly unlucky if an architect to act out of a relationship with a builder rather than in accordance with the contract as they are reportable to ARB which is publicised, can result in a large fine or struck off. It's the equivalent of the medical council but for architects.

You are seriously deluded, Architects have preferred builders, builders the clients trust to do the job on the say so of the "trusted architect". They make money together, they have close working relationships that they use to make lots of money together.


The only people the clients can trust when they smell a rat is the courts. When things go wrong like this the only people impartial are the courts.


Only going by one side of the story but that side clearly states the architect is siding with the builder on everything, the OP says no. If he wants to pay these late fees and forgo the penalty charges he may be due so be it, but the option is there. Fighting and no rolling over is the only option.

lush_walrus

bris wrote: »

You are seriously deluded, Architects have preferred builders, builders the clients trust to do the job on the say so of the "trusted architect". They make money together, they have close working relationships that they use to make lots of money together.


The only people the clients can trust when they smell a rat is the courts. When things go wrong like this the only people impartial are the courts.


Only going by one side of the story but that side clearly states the architect is siding with the builder on everything, the OP says no. If he wants to pay these late fees and forgo the penalty charges he may be due so be it, but the option is there. Fighting and no rolling over is the only option.

Not deluded thank you, it's my industry, I am an an architect.

I assume as you are still discussing courts and your reply is crude and incorrect you are not. Architects do not risk their registration on a back hander from a builder for a house extension!! Of course working relationships are established and trusting relationships formed, that does not make it corrupt that just makes business sense - the risk of a poor builder is reduced and the quality of work is known. What business doesn't do that.

There are many many disputes with architects - it's very likely in the contract arbitration features and a named arbitrator often is RIBA.

Your incorrect information is not going to aid the OP resolve their issue, it is going to actually show unreasonable behaviour if they skip arbitration and that is agreed in the contract, the whole point of it is to deal with matters outside of court - it is binding.

OP speak to ARB they are funded by architects but represent the public regulating the profession.