Charge for Files? 11

[ml13]

We get calls from fire protection companies asking us to send them our CAD files. We have had some discussions on whether we should bill them for this service, typically a nominal fee of $200 or so, depending on how many files, etc. Invariably, we get resistance from them when they hear we want to charge a fee.

This leads me to wonder how many others out there are charging fees for drawing files. Do you charge and why or why not?

Thanks.

 

[BigH]

If the fire protection firms are going to use your files for their purposes (and read this as: to make money for themselves) I'd charge them and $200 is low! Why else would they need your files except to help themselves - if so, then they pay. If it were your client who requested the drawings and you had a good relationship with him and foresaw more work, I'd probably give it to him.

 

[SperlingPE]

The company I work for also gets asked for CAD files.
I work for an A/E firm so it may be different for strictly engineering companies. Our view is that we give the files to fellow professionals or contractors/suppliers who are on the particular job. If we charge these entities, the fees ultimately come out of the owner's pocket (our client). We include a disclaimer on the drawings about use, property, dimensions, logos, professional stamps, etc. (like they are enforceable). By allowing the use of the CAD files it will also save time for the people we give them to.

 

[JStephen]

I'd charge them your cost, basically. I can't imagine it costing $200 to put files on a disk or email them.

The idea that they are going to make money, so stick it to them, is counter productive. And, yes, there are engineers that think like that. It translates as "Let's punish this contractor for nothing, then wonder why they bid high on our work in the future". It doesn't take long to figure out which engineers (and which owners) are easy to work with, and which ones are not.

 

[ml13]

As is the case in many arenas, it's not what it costs, but what it's worth.

 

[yack]

If you charge for the files, you are increasing your liability as to their correctness and accuracy? We don't charge at all, and send them out with the use at your own risk disclaimer, etc.

Does anyone have any comment on the liability issue? Perhaps this is an unnecessary worry?

 

[PEinc]

I ask for CAD files from engineers very frequently. I usually get them at no cost. BUT, usually I am making my design submission to the same engineer from whom I get the files and who will be reviewing and approving my design. I tell them that it will be easier for them to check my design if we are both working off the same base plan.

I will sign their waiver. I'll let them remove any title block information they desire. They can and do take off their names and seals. I clean up the drawing to remove unneeded details, layers, etc..

If they want to charge me for the drawing, I tell them to keep their plans and I'll do my own. Then I let the owner know that the engineer is not being cooperative at the owner's expense. Then, I may scan the drawing and trace the needed portions for my drawing. Or, I'll just draw my own with only the neede details.

 

[blake989]

Most specs that I have seen require subcontractors to produce their own shop drawings. The price for the contractor to generate these drwgs has already came out of the owners pocket when the sub bid the job, they are just trying to save a buck. However, when I am hit with such request, I create an adobe format and let them have it, or I ask what happened to their for construction set they were issued. This usually ends the inquiry. I would not bill them for fear of liability or other contractural issues.

 

[jjeng2]

I give CAD files out when requested. For Steel and Concrete and any other structurally important shop drawings I specifically say in my notes they can not use them for their drawings. I reject shop drawings that are reprints or marked up copies of structural drawings. Especially for steel drawings, having an experienced fabricator redraw from scratch is a great way to catch mistakes. If they just copied, mistakes would be copied through.

 

[structuresguy]

We are a E firm only, doing MEP work. Our philosophy is that we will give free electronic CAD (dwg) files to the architect. We will give free electronic plot files to a contractor. If a contractor wants CAD files, we charge them $50 per file. This applies equally to the contractor, all the subs, and any trades or product suppliers.

Too often we have seen our electronic backgrounds under the fire protection or concrete suppliers shop drawings. Even to the point where we have had concrete shop drawings come in with our exact details on them. They didn't even bother to fix typos, just cut and paste.

So if they are going to make money by using our CAD files, we are going to charge them. After all, whatever they copy is time and effort spent on their part not drafting it all from scratch.

That siad, I personally don't think we should ever give anyone our electronics. If someone wants a copy of our drawings, we shoudl send either hard copy or plot files. One of the big downsides in the laziness is the lack of the checking process which comes from a rebar detailer laying out a concrete floor from scratch, etc... Another set of eyes, and a trained mind, can catch things during their shop drawing creation process, which might have been missed, or at least unclear, on the contract drawings.

 

[AUCE98]

Our engineering firm has requests often for CAD drawings. We will send electronic files if the waiver has been signed and payment has been agreed upon. Our minimum is $100 per file with a $500 minimum. If a contractor or sub-contractor is using our backgrounds for their drawings, there is no reason not to charge them for that use.

 

[BFPartners]

Never give CAD drawings in raw format. PDF the drawings to a well known client only when future work will be generated. $200 charge is very low for your "professional" service.

More and more clients are asking for CAD files to reduce future drafting services...

 

[BigH]

Just want to make myself clear - as I read it the fire protection company (FPC) is NOT a contractor - he does not need the plans for the work he is doing which the engineering is also partaking. I read it that the FPC wants the files so that they have the ins and outs of the building they are going to protect. So, they are into making money for themselves - they are selling services and want information for free - no way. If the building owner who was/is a client asks for the drawings, then, as I indicated, I would probably give them to him or nominal charge depending on how good - or potentially good - he may be as a client. I have never "stuck" a fellow professional for information. Many a time, I dug out an old report, xeroxed it and sent it off to the client of 10 years earlier with my compliments.

 

[JStephen]

I don't do fire protection work, but would assume the fire protection contractor is laying out piping and sprinklers, and finds it convenient to overlay these on existing (and hopefully, accurate) drawings, rather than start drawing structures from scratch. Furnishing the drawing files for that purpose will problably get you a more accurate layout in less time. IE, it is advantageous to the owner.

There seems to be a perception that contractors just somehow make money pop out of the air. Every penny a contractor brings in is coming from the owners on different jobs. Any line of action that generally costs contractors money means the owners pay more. Any line of action that saves contractors money will in the long run save the owners money. We do have occasional dealings with engineers that will go out of their way to cost contractors money. As time goes on, the owners they work for begin paying through the nose for any work. We are currently dealing with one such situation, though I hear the engineers in question have lost their contract with the owner.

The same situation exists in regards to the original plan fees for contract documents, liquidated damages for completion, and a number of other issues.

It might be worthwhile to turn this question around. We have consulting engineers who ask us for sample drawings, specifications, etc. Should we charge them $100 a file? (Typical shop drawings are about 25 files). In most cases, they would not be willing to pay. But the cost to us to furnish these details is nominal, and the result of furnishing them is more accurate drawings and a sense of goodwill, so we furnish, and will continue to furnish, drawing files when requested, and at no charge.

 

[PEinc]

Well said, JStephen. Engineers and architects love for specialty subs, manufacturers, and suppliers to provide free information to them but want too be paid when they have to give out information or CAD files. It should work both ways.

 

[BigH]

Agree, JStephen; if the FPC is laying sprinklers, etc. for the owner (the engineer's client) it is to the Engineer's best interest, too, to let him have the plans (but why not through the owner?). My take was that the FPC was/is not a contractor but is like a fire protection manager in an ongoing situation. If that is not the case, I agree with your point.
and hope you all enjoyed your turkey!

 

[SperlingPE]

There is a difference (however slight) between releasing CAD files and receiving samples or other information from a supplier, specialty sub. The CAD files pertain to a particular job. Samples that are supplied (except for those made especially for a particular job) is supplied (usually) in pursuit of a sale or for the completion of a sale.

 

[PEinc]

I agree. There is a difference between CAD files provided to contractors and other information provided to engineers and architect. However, the similarity it that provision of either saves someone a lot of time and money. Engineers and architects like for contractors and suppliers to tell them how to address problems and to give them specifications, procedures, and product information. It saves them time and money and frequently makes them look a lot smarter than they really are. One hand washes the other. Give out the CAD files - for free, as long as it takes minimal time. All of the perceived risks can be handled with written relaeses.

 

[structuresguy]

I can't believe what I am hearing from some of you. You can't expect people to believe that there is no difference between an engineer's custom designed and created drawings for a specific project, and the cut sheets and CAD drawings that a product supplier would provide.

If they want to sell their product, then they absolutely must give out drawings and specs, for free, to the people who are specifiying their product. THere is no way around that. It is a fact.

However, their is no good reason, other than cost, that I should ever give out CAD files to a sub contractor or product supplier. They get hard copy drawings, if they require them.

And don't try to fool anybody that this is costing the contractor money, and hence, also the owner. The contractor is saving money by paying me to draw up his backgrounds, that is why he is willing to pay $50-$100 per file in CAD format. If he was not saving money, he would not pay. Plain and simple. Besides, by the time I get requested for drawings, the contract is already awarded. The contractor has already agreed upon a price to do the job, and is now looking to save every dollar he can. Not for the owner, but for himself. Let me repeat that. NOT FOR THE OWNER.... In a typical design/bid/build, the contrator is not going to give any money left over back to the owner. Next thing I am going to hear we should be doing construction admin work for free, like RFI and shop drawing reviews.

Why should the engineer help the contractor make his profit, the contractor certainly never helps the engineer. Every chance they get, they try for change orders or claim damages. Hell, there are even books published specifically to show contractors how to find and exploit change orders. Not to mention the law firms whose sole purpose is construction claims.

I may sound bitter when it comes to dealing with contractors, but I have seen very little reason not to be bitter. The system puts the largest portion of resposibility, and ultimately blame, on the engineer, but rewards him with the lowest piece of the pie. Hell, even teh real estate agent who sells the building makes more than the engineer who designed it.

 

[PEinc]

Giving an architect or engineer product literature or specifications is no guarantee that a particular product will be ultimately chosen. Usually there is a provision for the allowance of an "or equal." I stand by my previous posting.