Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations pierreick on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Client/Owner tells you upfront he intends to build without a permit 9

Status
Not open for further replies.

gte447f

Structural
Dec 1, 2008
754
A prospective new client was referred to me by an architect. The prospective client is a home owner that is planning to build an addition on the back of his home. He also apparently holds a residential/light commercial general contractor license in my state, but he says he doesn't work as a general contractor (he is a banker turned real estate investor/developer). He has a set of conceptual plans (Not For Construction) from his architect neighbor. The addition is 2 stories and about 2,000 sf and is to be built on wood columns about 10 feet above grade (because it's in a flood plain apparently, see below). Part of the addition also involves taking in and enclosing an existing, covered wood deck. The conceptual plan looks pretty sketchy from a structural perspective. One particularly sketchy part of the plan is that the client/owner has already built a foundation himself, without an engineered design as far as I know, which consists of 2'x2'x12" concrete footings, each on a single helical pile, at the planned locations of the wood columns. I have asked for documentation of the foundation design and the helical pile installations, but I doubt that there is any.

So, I have a lot of reservations about the architect's and the owner's conceptual plan, and then to top it off, the owner straight up tells me that he intends to build without applying for a permit. The reason given is that he thinks the addition is located in a flood plain, and the city may reject his plan for that reason. His stated budget for the construction is $200,000, which I think is on the light side, but if he is GCing it himself and cutting corners he might be able pull it off for that amount of money..

I am leaning toward declining the project, because I think the conceptual plan is going to be a nightmare to design structurally, and I probably won't be able to get a reasonable fee to deal with the headaches, plus I get the vibe that the owner is going to be a hassle to deal with because he already has his mind made up on everything and just wants someone to rubber stamp his ideas.

On ethical grounds though, my question is whether it is acceptable to move forward knowing that the owner intends to intentionally subvert the building permitting process? My instinct is telling me that this alone should be a deal breaker. Thoughts?
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

I don't consider it my obligation to make sure that people get permits for their work, so that aspect alone isn't a deal breaker for me. Just keep in mind the possibility that, one day, you will be asked to justify the code compliance of the entire structure once the building official catches on.
 
BrianPetersen, nice and succinct. Thank you.
 
kipfoot, I also don't consider it my obligation to make sure that people get permits for their work, but I generally recommend and assume that that they will. Sometimes a client/homeowner will tell me that their contractor doesn't want to get a permit for a remodeling project, and I always tell the client/owner that a permit is most likely required, and they should check with the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ), regardless of what their contractor says. In this case the client/owner, who is also GCing the project himself and is in fact a licensed Residential/Light Commercial General Contractor, is blatantly stating upfront that the $200,000+ project will not be permitted because he wants to avoid certain regulatory reviews and approvals/denials. I am not familiar with the General Contractor licensing rules, but surely he is violating them by not permitting the work, and isn't their something in our (engineer's) licensing rules that prohibits helping or willfully going along with rule violations of others?
 
Generally speaking, I would approach as @kipfoot. I honestly think it is beyond an engineer's means to do the enforcing of permitted work. What they can do instead is: design it in accordance with best practices; satisfy the code requirements in their design to make it safe; provide the necessary field review to ascertain general conformance with the design drawings; and also recommend (or delegate the responsibility) to apply for permit in the original scope of work document.
 
I think that you have to turn this down since you know his intent... else I would do it. It's difficult to plead ignorance, if you know what he is planning. With work I do, I generally assume the client is 'going the proper route', but I don't check.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?

-Dik
 
A point I was trying to make was that, of all the things going on with this project, the lack of permit wouldn't be the one that makes me walk away. My list would look something like:

1) You have reason to believe that the structure is not allowed to be constructed in its location. (In my opinion, this is the bigger ethical issue.)
2) The footing capacity can't be verified ( a professional practice issue dealing with whether you can approve the footings)
3) A hard-to-deal-with client (nobody got time for that)
4) Their schematic gives you the idea that they don't know what they're doing (to be fair, maybe they realized that they're in over their heads and that they need your help, but still, nobody got time for that either)
.
.
.
x) no permit. I don't see it as you 'going along' with a rule violation. You could very well issue your drawings with a seal and marked "for permit."
 
kipfoot, point(s) taken. I basically feel the way you describe. As I discussed the project with the owner, it seemed to me to be a laundry list of one issue or red flag after another, and then he topped it off with, "oh, and by the way, I'm not going to be permitting this, because I think the city might not go along with my plan, and I want to be able to do whatever I want, so screw them."

I will pass, on principle. I do feel like it would be unethical to facilitate the project, knowing that he intends to cut corners, but I also feel like people like this owner, who flout the rules at every opportunity to get their way, deserve to hit every road block along the path instead of having people line up for the privilege of making their life easier and more convenient. That may be me reading a lot into this situation, but that is honestly the vibe I have gotten from this owner.

Thanks for the feedback.
 
I dont see why you would care but have to ask, are you certain that he actually needs a permit? He's not subverting any process if he isn't legally required to have a permit, and I've met an amazing number of "professionals" insisting that they're needed for everything. I must've heard the topic mentioned a half-dozen times during our last custom build and every time I stated that they weren't needed you'd have thought I murdered Santa Claus. No doubt someone mistook me for building illegally.
 
Since he already started construction just tell him he doesn't need you. He seems to be someone who already knows everything anyway.

If he doesn't get a permit, I'm not sure why he hires someone for design after ha already started construction. Obviously they are not concerned with doing things the correct way.

Run
 
CWB1, yes, I'm absolutely certain he needs a permit. Also, needing a permit and needing a licensed design professional are not the same thing. Essentially all residential construction needs a permit (in this and most jurisdictions), but only stuff that doesn't conform to the IRC cookbook needs a licensed design professional. In this case, the owner needs both, but the design professional doesn't have to be me.
 
gte447f- careful with 'most' there. It's my understanding that 'most' of the Midwest might as well be the wild west when it comes to residential permitting. If it doesn't fall down during construction, it'll probably last until the next tornado.

As for your situation, I agree we're not responsible for enforcement, but I think we do have a duty to public safety and if, in your jurisdiction, that is maintained through a rigorous zoning review, permitting, and inspection process, I think you would be complicit if you went along knowingly.

Have a clause in my contacts that the client agrees to release me from liability and indemnify me if they fail to get required permits and inspections.
 
phamENG, fair point, perhaps I shouldn't have said "most" unequivocally, but in the jurisdictions where I practice, "all" might well be correct. I like the idea of your contract clause releasing you from liability and indemnifying you if the project fails to get required permits and inspections. I may think about incorporating something to that effect in my contracts. Thanks for sharing.
 
Just a caution... if you know something is illegal to start with, you cannot enter into a contract...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?

-Dik
 
So this begs the question...
Do we report the individual to the AHJ? If not, aren't we still complicit? Where do we draw the line in being the Building Police?
I generally do not care if someone gets a permit or not. As others have noted, it is the other red flags that are more of an issue.
 
Can't be complicit to a situation that you don't know about. So ... don't know about it.

It isn't like someone is building an unpermitted dam over a river that's going to flood a whole city if (when?) it collapses.

If the neighbors who don't like the view of what they're seeing care, let them be the ones to make inquiries.

Random thoughts about situations in which significant unpermitted building alterations might create some difficulties for the owner themselves:
Finding legitimate contractors who value their insurance policies, to get it built in the first place.
House insurance, if it ever does get built.
Selling the property at some future date.

This is a little more significant than installing an extra electrical outlet, or installing a dimmer switch, "to code" but without a permit. But the consequences are to the owner themselves. Ensure that you don't know whether they applied for a permit. "Somebody else's problem"
 

Is a permit required for this type of work? I didn't think normal maintenance required permits.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?

-Dik
 
Essentially all residential construction needs a permit (in this and most jurisdictions), but only stuff that doesn't conform to the IRC cookbook needs a licensed design professional.

Nonsense. Most of the US is rural unincorporated but even most major metros have various exemptions and bend over to protect residential property owner's building rights, often going so far as to require the local muni engineer to help owners resolve engineering issues without hiring an outside firm. Given that this is GA (less regulated) and a contractor/residential owner I'd wager he had an exemption and the difficult attitude was a test that you failed. If he proceeds with construction you could report him for potentially needing a permit, but if he has an exemption then he could sue claiming harassment. If you insisted that he needed an outside professional or permit when he didn't, he could also pursue a fraud charge against you.

I didn't think normal maintenance required permits.

Depends largely on whether its a homeowner or professional doing the work stateside. Even less-regulated areas have gotten rather petty with professionals IMHO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor