Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws 5

[kxa]

Here is a situation that while I would like to help out, I don't think it is the right thing to do. A client that did not ask me to supervise the foundation construction and went ahead and completed the work without the inspection by the town bldg. inspector, can not get his foundation approved. Supposedly, the inspector wants him to take out the foundation or get a letter from an engineer that everything was done according to the code. This client is now asking me to look at his digital photos and produce that letter.

For this situation and perhaps others, is there any reference guides out there that set the legal or ethical limits on what engineers can do or for that matter, should not do?

Thanks,

 

[GregLocock]

Ask the inspector if it is OK to sign off based on photos. This has two advantages - if it is not acceptable then the authorities are forewarned, and if it is then you have checked.

This assumes that you are happy enough to take the entire responsibility for the foundations based on some photos. Which is your call.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[Ron]

Greg...good points. I agree.

kxa...if you decide to "sign off" on this foundation, be sure the photos represent all that is necessary. It is difficult to get dimensions right in photographic review, and in this case, you have to be concerned about dimensions, particularly cover dimensions. If the foundation has anything other than typical stresses, the other dimensions become more important as well.

Is photographic documentation to such a degree normal with this client or was there some willfull neglect going on that caused him/her to forego the inspection and provide a few photos of some "good" areas hoping to sway you or the inspector?

Lastly, in your letter (if you choose to write one) you MUST qualify what you didn't see. For instance, you can infer that rebar is present everywhere, but you can't assert that it's there. In any case, without regard to the caveats you place in the letter if you decide to write it, you are accepting the validity of this foundation as a licensed professional engineer.

What will their next request be? "Sign off on this building we just finished...Yeah, we know you didn't get to see it built, but here...look at my photos. It's all good!"

 

[Ussuri]

The thought of approving something from photos sends shivers down my spine. brrrrrr...

I assume from the way you describe the individual as 'Client' means you have had professional dealings with them in the past (if not on this project). Why then did they not get the Engineer involved at the construction stage? Do they have something to hide, or am I just being a little paranoid?

 

[FSS]

Good points above. Also, what kind of foundation is it? You must consider final use to see how important every last detail is to verify. For example, you may not be as concerned about a porch slab as you would be with a highly loaded footing elsewhere.

 

[zcp]

kxa,
Don't set a precedent here where your client thinks they can do it this way all the time. I can hear it now for the next project....."but kxa let's us do it all the time and we have never had a problem."

If all they are giving you is photos, I would require some (possibly invasive) testing in the areas that were not 100% covered by the photos. X-ray, UT, whatever. Your client needs to realize there is a procedure that must be followed here and the engineer is here to help with problems, not take responsibility when the client wants to skip steps / cover something up / beat schedule / etc.

ZCP

http://www.phoenix-engineer.com

 

[RARWOOD]

I wish I could use the response, get a building inspector to sign off on it. I work in Minnesota, and it seems very common for building inspectors to ask for a letter from an engineer to put in there files to show everthing is OK.

There are many cases where that is appropriate. However at times what they are asking the engineer to do violates state registration requirements. For example certifying plans that were prepared by an out of state engineer.

What you do depends on the factors mentioned by others above. Is the builder a regular client, did you desigh the foundations.

I dealt with a similair case recently where the solution was to have a testing lab x-ray a wall to verify the prescence of rebar. In your case a testing lab probably can provide information which you can use to write the requested letter.

 

[JAE]

I think its not ethical to "sign off" on this in any way.

Ron's point: Lastly, in your letter (if you choose to write one) you MUST qualify what you didn't see was exactly the thing I was thinking.

You cannot list out some things you see, then list some things you don't see...and then say the whole foundation is fine and meets code. The unseen things are still serious unknowns.

Can you take the contractor's word about what rebar does or does not exist within the concrete? I've never felt that I could.

It may be that your letter (with qualifications per Ron) is all you can do. Whether this is satisfactory to the building inspector or not is up to the building authorities...and not up to you. You can only do and say what you can only do or know.

 

[prost]

I agree with RARSWC--in many states, what you are being asked to do is illegal, and if caught, your licensed pulled, you might even be fined. If something bad happens, say the foundation is damaged and the building collapses, you might even be jailed. Personally I would have a problem with this ethically and anyone who asked you to do this would be crossed off the client list as soon as all current projects with said client are completed.

 

[Ashereng]

One more thought.

The concrete used in the Big Dig was suspect.

I am no civil by any stretch, but can you tell the quality of concrete by digital photo alone?

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[JStephen]

I don't think that there's any way you could look at photos and produce a letter that "everything was done according to code". You could produce a letter that says "Based on the attached photographs, everything appears to be according to code, but the work was not inspected in progress." Of course, that might not be adequate to get the building permit, either.

It's perfectly okay to write an engineering report of what you saw, but it should be qualified based on the limit of observation. That's different from writing a letter that everything is okay.

 

[EddyC]

Either the foundation is "OK" or it is "not OK". It can't be "OK with disclaimers". All this sounds like what one of the senior engineers did at my current job (He added 20 kips of localized load on a building roof and then put a disclaimer "Not Responsible For Structural Stability of Building" on the PE stamped structural construction drawings.

 

[Ron]

EddyC....there's a reason he's your senior engineer.

 

[EddyC]

Ron,

Do you really think its appropriate for the EOR on a project to put such a disclaimer on drawings, as the senior engineer I described did? Kindly elaborate because it seems contradictory to what an EOR is all about.

 

[kxa]

Thank you all for your responses. Honestly, I did not think I would get so many responses. Looks like we are all pretty much saying the same thing and that is not to do it. This client had the chance to wait for the bldg. inspector and chose to go ahead with the concrete work. He also had the chance to contact me to verify the rebars and the concrete before pouring it and covering up the whole thing. I am sure the town inspector knows that no engineer in the right mind would vouch for the owner's work based on some photos. In fact, he could even turn in the engineer who writes such a letter.

I also agree with EddyC that if I put any disclaimer to cover myself, it would render the letter useless if not ridiculous.

One final word, if the town inspector who is a code certified individual is not satisfied by looking at the photos, why should I be.

Again, thanks so much for everybody’s input.

 

[daveh6729]

Don't do it unless he is your best friend!

 

[daveh6729]

and has enough money for you to retire in Aruba!

 

[JAE]

EddyC - I can see the point you make about a foundation either being OK or no OK. But in the situation of the original post, this isn't a case of an Engineer of Record designing a building and then putting out all sorts of disclaimers.

What this post is concerned with is someone asking an engineer to come in after the fact and [red]take full responsibility for the foundation design[/red].

This isn't something that is possible.

What is possible, is what many of the posters above have recommended, that the engineer can offer to do at least a study of [blue]what may be known[/blue] and report that to the client. What an engineer cannot do (which I think you agree with) is say its all OK.

I'm not suggesting saying its OK with disclaimers. Rather, I'm saying: "here's what we know. here's what we don't know" - and leave it at that. You're correct that this sort of thing may be useless to the owner (he wants a permit after all), but its all a good engineer should do.

This is, pure and simple, a case of someone wanting an engineer to put the monkey on his back and take full responsiblity for "everything" foundation related.

 

[Ron]

EddyC...I don't know all the details of your issue, but disclaimers are routine.

Yes, an EOR must be willing to take responsibility for design/analysis done under his responsible charge.

Was this a modification to an existing structure for which the stability could not be checked given your contracted scope of services? If so, your senior engineer was correct in protecting the liability of the company and his personal liability.

Did the 20k load have any basis? Were there any limitations placed on your services by your client?

There are many reasons to use disclaimers; however, bad engineering is not one of them. I hope that wasn't done in your case. If it was, you are correct to be alarmed.

The issue of the foundation acceptance is not as "black and white" as you have stated, and is a much more common occurrence than you might think. I have had similar requests made of me over the years. My approach is to use the photos as one of several tools to help me check the construction of the foundation. I also use destructive and nondestructive testing to locate rebar, check the compressive strength, and validate physical measurements. Then I will provide a letter stating what I did and what I found. "Approval" is then something that the governing inspection authority may grant based on more information. "Approval" is not something that we, as engineers, have the authority to grant. It sometimes becomes a semantic sparring match, but the semantics are very important once the lawsuits or complaints start.

 

[kxa]

One note. I was the engineer who designed the foundation but that is where it ended. I was not asked to supervise the work and the inspector never had a chance to verify the steel/concrete placement, etc. It is all covered up now and the client does not want to expose the foudation. All he wants me or the inspector to look at are the photos. I even think the inspector is looking for a way out and wants to hang it on me.

True, we all have to work with some limited info at some time and with some assumptions, do our work. In this situation, the home owner is dictating what should be adequate for an engineer to base his decision on and, that is wrong. If he knows better, he shoulden't be coming to us in the first place!!