Architect is copy-pasting underpinning design from another project - I'm worried about my risks 3

[Geoffre14]

As a structural engineering firm, in response to very specific scope RFP, we were hired to provide sizing of masonry lintels and wood joist sizes--nothing else.

We are not stamping any plans or calculations. Our sizes were communicated to the architect via email, to be incorporated into their plans.

I have come to find out that the architect is copy-pasting an underpinning design from a neighboring, similar building.

I have suggested both verbally and in written emails that they hire an underpinning engineer. I have also suggested that a lateral analysis should be performed due to the large openings they are creating in the existing shear walls; my firm is capable of this work but it is outside our scope per the contract. To date, the architect has ignored our advice.

I am very worried that--because we are the only engineer on the team and despite not stamping any work--we could face risk if something goes wrong. Even if nothing collapses, any delays due to someone else flagging the project (building dept, contractor, neighboring residents), my firm could get roped into litigation.

I would quit the job if I was wasn't worried about being somehow liable for not performing to the contract we've entered. The fee is tiny. (Obviously, this is all occurring because the architect is trying to pinch pennies.)

I can't tell if I am overreacting.

What would you recommend? Am I overreacting? I've made my opinion clear to the architect in writing, and I am stamping nothing. Is the architect taking on all the risk and do I have none?

 

[msquared48]

Express your concern to the building department in writing. You have given the Architect a chance. Does not sound like a client I would continue to work with anyway.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[Geoffre14]

Thanks Mike. I appreciate your input.

First, it sounds like you don't think I'm overreacting then?

Second, in the future, we will definitely cut things off with this architect. I need a strategy just for this project.

Last, I feel reporting to the building dept would be poking the hornet's nest. I've had no direct contact with the homeowner: if you were in their shoes, wouldn't you be pissed this sub-consultant is seemingly sabotaging your project since he didn't get more scope/fee? (We are NOT aiming for more fee--just trying to cover our asses here).

I'll put it this way: going to the building will be a last resort, nuclear option if I feel completely backed against the wall. Not ruling it out, but hope to resolve this some other way first.

 

[KootK]

I think that your concern is quite valid. Structural engineers in my area routinely get roped into lawsuits involving building envelope failures. I no longer do work where I don't provide a separate, stamped product for just this reason.

While it would cost you time and money, I would produce a stamped drawing where you can take the opportunity to specifically draw attention to important items that should be designed "by others".

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[Ron]

Geoffre14....I agree with Mike. An incorrigible architect will only respond to an authority that can control him....the building official.

Further, it seems you suffer from the same malady as a lot of us......didn't use a contract or your contract doesn't contain a clause of document ownership. If you do not have such a clause in your standard contract, put one in. Here is mine....you're welcome to copy it...I have redacted my company name and replaces with X's.

13. Documents. XXX will furnish Client the agreed upon number of written reports and supporting documents. These instruments of service are furnished for Client’s exclusive internal use and reliance, but not for advertising or other type of distribution, and are subject to the following:
a. All documents generated by XXX under this Agreement shall remain the sole property of XXX. Any unauthorized use or distribution of XXX’s work shall be at Client’s and recipient’s sole risk and without liability to XXX. XXX may retain a confidential file copy of its work product and related documents.
b. If Client desires to release, or for XXX to provide, report(s) to a third party not described herein for that party’s reliance, XXX will agree to such release provided written acceptance is received from such third party to be bound by acceptable terms and conditions similar to this Agreement (e.g. Secondary Client Agreement). Reports provided for disclosure of information only will not require separate agreement. Client acknowledges and agrees to inform such third party that XXX’s report(s) reflects conditions only at the time of the study and may not reflect conditions at a later time. Client further acknowledges that such request for release creates a potential conflict of interest for XXX and by this request Client waives any such claim if XXX complies with the request.
c. Client agrees that all documents furnished to Client or Client’s agents or designees, if not paid for, will be returned upon demand and will not be used by Client or any other entity for any purpose whatsoever. Client further agrees that documents produced by XXX pursuant to this Agreement will not be used for any project not expressly provided for in this Agreement without XXX’s prior written approval.
d. Client shall furnish documents or information reasonably within Client’s control and deemed necessary by XXX for proper performance of its services. XXX may rely upon Client-provided documents in performing the services required under this Agreement; however, XXX assumes no responsibility or liability for their accuracy. Client-provided documents will remain the property of the Client, but XXX may retain one confidential file copy as needed to support its report.
e. Upon Client’s request, XXX’s work product may be provided on electronic or digital media. By such request, Client agrees that the written copy retained by XXX in its files, with at least one conformed written copy provided to Client, shall be the official base document. XXX makes no warranty or representation to Client that the electronic or digital copy is accurate or complete, but will correct in good faith any omissions or errors brought to XXX’s attention by Client. Any modifications of such electronic or digital copy by Client shall be at Client’s risk and without liability

 

[Ron]

KootK's advice is also good. Along those lines, you can get into problems with your state board by providing designs that are not signed and sealed. Not sure where you're located, but from the sense of the postings, I'm assuming the US.

Signed/sealed or not, you're still responsible for your design. When it is improperly used by cutting and pasteing on another project, you might still have to defend yourself from an initial claim. It might not stick, but it costs time and money to defend any claim, so it is always best not to get invited to that party.

Further, the architec will likely say that you didn't tell him that the design was not "portable" and that you didn't say that he couldn't use it again.

If the architect refuses to remove the design and continues to use it, contact the architectural licensing board and file a complaint.

 

[msquared48]

All this is tempered with the caveat that Architects are allowed to do some structural engineering - what they are comfortable with and proficient at only.
The problem is not only determining that line, but the use of the details of other projects where he is unfamiliar with any design limitations, among other issues.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[KootK]

Is that true in other states besides IL Mike?

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[Geoffre14]

Ron - Thanks for your input. I think there is a slight misunderstanding: my drawings are not the ones being re-used. A different engineer's drawings are being reused on a project that I am on.

KootK - this is a good possible solution. Thank you.

 

[JLNJ]

I believe the architects' union is a strong one and they can seal about anything in most States.

Engineers have a lot of leeway as well. In States which don't register by discipline, engineers can let their conscience be their guide when it comes to which discipline of engineering drawings they choose to seal.

 

[BAretired]

BA in red:
I would quit the job if I was wasn't worried about being somehow liable for not performing to the contract we've entered. Your contract did not anticipate the architect acting unprofessionally by using another engineer's design; the architect has invalidated the contract. (Obviously, this is all occurring because the architect is trying to pinch pennies.)

I can't tell if I am overreacting. You're not.

What would you recommend? Am I overreacting? I've made my opinion clear to the architect in writing, and I am stamping nothing. Is the architect taking on all the risk and do I have none? Hard to say without knowing the law in your jurisdiction, but chances are you will be dragged through the court if it goes that far. Better to get out now or state your conditions for continuing.

BA

 

[msquared48]

KootK:

Don't know, but it is here. I'm in WA.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[BAretired]

The issue is not whether the architect has the right to practice structural engineering in a particular jurisdiction. The issue is that he is copy-pasting the underpinning design performed by another engineer on another project; that is unprofessional conduct. The OP cannot continue on the project unless the architect modifies his ways.

BA

 

[msquared48]

I agree.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[Ron]

KootK....similar here in Florida...but limited to "engineering incidental to architecture" and the engineering law says "architecture incidental to engineering". So some crossover is allowed.

Sorry G14....I didn't get that from your original post. In any case, if you assume the responsibility for the engineering that was done by others, you have to go through certain procedures in order to "make it your own".

 

[IFRs]

You could and perhaps should follow up your call and email with a letter to the architect voicing your possible concern about the public safety (which is your first responsibility as a PE) and outlining the steps that a PE is required to go through if he/she sees what he/she thinks may be a threat to public safety. Or perhaps just send a letter quoting the section of the law that describes copy-pasting someone else's work for another project as a breach of ethical behavior, and the penalty of such behavior. The object would be to point out the penalty of such behavior so that the architect would be encouraged to go to the owner and say they can't continue working with them because it would be a breach of their ethics and could cost them their business. You could also go back-door and contact the building official with a question similar to "I have become aware of an architect that MAY be using drawings from a previous project on a new and different structure - is this an issue and what would be the best way to address it?" Stir up the pot a little before going nuclear.

 

[Brad805]

Do you work for architects like this frequently? Architects or clients that limit your scope of works to this degree are prime candidates to do exactly this type of thing. The difference here is you found out about it. Time to work on your client interview process.

 

[IFRs]

Thing is, it is a small world and the community of architects and engineers is smaller yet. Can't get into a fight or won't have work. Need to express concerns without making enemies.

 

[msquared48]

In general, yes. However the world is full of idiots.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[BUGGAR]

This reminds me, I'd better get familiar with the termination clause in my contracts.