Do architects have a business dependancy on specific builders?

Jeepers_Creepers

Hi Harlan.

As said above. (Tho' I am still scratching my head over Mistral's comment - I can't really see that being the case).

Architects should just do their job. Once the plans are produced, these are used to get quotes - they should be on an identical basis 'cos they have been given identical plans. Most (all) Archis will be able to recommend builders they know and trust, so by all means include them in your quota of quotes. But it's also worth trying to get personal recommendations for builders yourself.

All builders will 'know' their local Archis, and will understand clearly their pros and cons. There's an Arch around here who turns out nice designs, but leaves the majority of the working out to the actual builder - they don't even show proper floor levels, which pee's-off builders big time. They don't like working on his jobs as they feel they are having to do a lot of the 'working out'.

For a loft conversion we had carried out 15 years ago when new to the area, we first asked s seemingly-respected local Archi, but all his initial ideas came back as ground-floor extensions instead which he kept insisting is what we should be having - despite us pointing out we wanted height to take advantage of the voos. He then ignored us when we insisted we wanted the loft converted. Bizarre. Until we were told he was in cahoots with a particular local builder - who didn't do loft conversions. We struck lucky with the second Archi for that job - he gave us a vaulted design we hadn't considered.

This year - with a rear extension - there was a new Archi on the scene who impressed us and had a good reputation, and we were also very lucky to find a local (200 yards...) builder who was the true 'salt of the earth' type and superbly skilled. The Archi hadn't heard of this one-man-and-his-son builder, but the builder had come across the Archi's work before and was happy with it. The Archi had three builders she could personally recommend without hesitation, so we were happy to let them have a go at quoting too. She also warned me off another local builder who'd got in touch with us after our plans had been submitted - she gave completely valid (and true) stories about their incompetence, having had to deal with them on a previous job. Man, she was fiery with them, and this 5'-nothing lady had called him 'completely incompetent' to his face on the site she was in charge of!

Anyhoo, we went with our 'own' local builder in the end, and he was simply brilliant - and is now a family friend. Our Archi was perfectly happy with this.

Bottom line - use your judgement. Trust your Archi - unless you have proper cause or suspicion not to. Ultimately, tho', they produce the designs, and you choose the builder. But listen carefully to them about the builders they recommend and any they don't - making sure they explain why. I think you'll sense genuineness pretty easily.

GDB2222

Good builders are hard to find, and architects know that. If you’re using a builder that the architect has recommended then he will need to maintain good relations with the builder, whereas he may never see the clients again once the job is finished.

Doozergirl

GDB2222 said:

Good builders are hard to find, and architects know that. If you’re using a builder that the architect has recommended then he will need to maintain good relations with the builder, whereas he may never see the clients again once the job is finished.

He?           

I can almost understand the casual sexism when it comes to builders, but architects?

Jeepers_Creepers

Doozergirl said:

GDB2222 said:

Good builders are hard to find, and architects know that. If you’re using a builder that the architect has recommended then he will need to maintain good relations with the builder, whereas he may never see the clients again once the job is finished.

He?           

I can almost understand the casual sexism when it comes to builders, but architects?

Is 'pedant' gender-neutral enough for you :-)

Jeepers_Creepers

GDB2222 said:

Good builders are hard to find, and architects know that. If you’re using a builder that the architect has recommended then he will need to maintain good relations with the builder, whereas he may never see the clients again once the job is finished.

Yes. This Arch we used has builders constantly trying to get on her 'recommended' books as she has become the go-to person in our locality. They have to prove themselves solidly for her to entertain that - as you say, her reputation is affected too.

Sadly, all three of 'her' builders - who we met and were every impressed by - were too costly for us to entertain - not that they were 'expensive' as such, but only that it didn't make the project viable for us.

We got very lucky with our local builder.

Doozergirl

Jeepers_Creepers said:

Doozergirl said:

GDB2222 said:

Good builders are hard to find, and architects know that. If you’re using a builder that the architect has recommended then he will need to maintain good relations with the builder, whereas he may never see the clients again once the job is finished.

He?           

I can almost understand the casual sexism when it comes to builders, but architects?

Is 'pedant' gender-neutral enough for you :-)

Are you a woman in the construction industry? 

If you are, despite the fact that it's incredibly rude, I'll give you the grace to say that to me. 

If you aren't, it's grossly insulting.  

It takes no effort at all to be inclusive, not 'neutral'.  

Jeepers_Creepers

Doozergirl said:

Are you a woman in the construction industry? 

If you are, despite the fact that it's incredibly rude, I'll give you the grace to say that to me. 

If you aren't, it's grossly insulting.  

It takes no effort at all to be inclusive, not 'neutral'.  

I'll be a woman - if you want me to be.

Hey, Doozer, it was a joke - hence me also 'liking' your previous post.

(I'm pretty sure you weren't insulted by my 'pedant' joke, but if you were or thought I was trivialising the issue, I apologise unreservedly. I also suspect GDB wasn't being intentionally insulting - it's sometimes easy to neglect to use 'they' or 'he/she'. But I totally get your point.)

Doozergirl

Jeepers_Creepers said:

Doozergirl said:

Are you a woman in the construction industry? 

If you are, despite the fact that it's incredibly rude, I'll give you the grace to say that to me. 

If you aren't, it's grossly insulting.  

It takes no effort at all to be inclusive, not 'neutral'.  

I'll be a woman - if you want me to be.

Hey, Doozer, it was a joke - hence me also 'liking' your previous post.

(I'm pretty sure you weren't insulted by my 'pedant' joke, but if you were or thought I was trivialising the issue, I apologise unreservedly. I also suspect GDB wasn't being intentionally insulting - it's sometimes easy to neglect to use 'they' or 'he/she'. But I totally get your point.)

Sorry.  I lost my sense of humour this morning. It might be the wine I drank yesterday.  😬

GDB2222

I don’t say they when I mean a single person. That’s far too confusing. And he/she is very cumbersome.  English is an evolving language, and soon it will evolve a gender neutral pronoun hopefully.

Doozergirl

GDB2222 said:

Aww I don’t say they when I mean a single person. That’s far too confusing. And he/she is very cumbersome.  English is an evolving language, and soon it will evolve a gender neutral pronoun hopefully.

Do you also use a similarly offensive word to replace 'you' when need a word to describe it in singular and plural forms? 

'They' has been used in the singular for hundreds of years, is perfectly sensible and doesn't offend women (in particular but not limited to them).