Contractor Revising Documents 3

[Rabbit12]

This is a new one for me.

Awhile back we had a contractor submit a set of shoring drawings/calcs. Our specs require the shoring be designed by an engineered and stamped/sealed. The first submittal was great. Engineer wrote a letter, provided a drawing, we accepted...everyone is happy.

Fast forward a few weeks and we get a second shoring submittal for shoring on a different site, same project. We started looking at the submittal and it was clear text in the letter was (poorly) removed with what appears to be whiteout. The pile spacing of the shoring was written in by hand. On the drawing the depth and reveal of the pile is written in by hand. We compared the new submittal to the first one and it was obvious the contractor revised that first submittal. All references to the engineering firm were whited-out. In the title block of the drawing it appears a piece of paper was placed over the engineer's stamp and the name of the engineering company. The stamps were also removed (I assume covered with paper) and then scanned.

Unethical at best.

We rejected the submittal and are contemplating whether this deserves a call to the engineer. They removed all his references but the fact they just manipulated his design makes me real uneasy.

Thoughts on what we should do?

 

[phamENG]

100% call the engineer who produced the drawings.

 

[cvg]

if it wasnt stamped and sealed, than return the submittal without review until a properly stamped and signed submittal gets resubmitted. and call the contractor and make it clear that you will be checking with the engineer once it gets resubmitted to make sure it was his design

 

[GeoEnvGuy]

Agree with CVG's comments on returning the submittal that was not stamped/sealed as required and informing the contractor that you will be reaching out to the engineer on the resubmittal.

My only contribution would be to inform the first submittals engineer as a courtesy to inform them that you believe the contractor is trying to use his previous design for unintended purposes.

 

[msquared48]

Rabbit12:

Had this happen to me a couple of times over the years. The contractor was trying to get by without paying additional engineering fees. The local jurisdiction caught it for me in both cases. Real bad counter-fitting effort, luckily.

This is called theft, to make it simple, and is putting the project engineer in jeopardy.

This instance really needs to be formally reported to the state board and the contractor censured, at least, for the record. Don't expect much else, realistically.

I agree with the other comments.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA, HI)

 

[racookpe1978]

Bookmarked. I did not expect this kind of example of blatant theft of professional services in today's world.

Which, perhaps, is telling.

 

[ACtrafficengr]

NYSDOT puts a note by the title block saying that any modifications must be described and sealed by the altering engineer. Would that help?

My glass has a v/c ratio of 0.5

Maybe the tyranny of Murphy is the penalty for hubris. -

http://xkcd.com/319/