Liability due to separate reports 7

[EngStuff]

We had a call today from a contractor that asked if we could provide a report that addressed the city concerns and provide repairs. During the call, I mentioned that if we see other structural issues that were not noted by the city, we will have to note them down on the report too. Contractor asked if we could provide two reports, one for the city to address their concern only, and a separate report for anything else that we see and note down. I asked the big guy (the boss) he said he is not willing to chance anything for a few hundred dollars, so we did turn down the job. We all had a back and forth in the office of what we thought.

Would engineers be held liable if there ends up being an issue that we brought up on a separate report that was not fixed. Because we are providing everything that the city requested strictly on one report, and another report strictly on what the contractor needs to do on other things that the city didn't bring up "catch".

One of the engineers had a good point about even if we don't get sued or are not financially liable, we are morally liable, and is an ethics violation. That became another back and forth too of ethically we brought it up to the contractor, we cannot assume what the contractor will or won't do. So even if the city didn't ask for it, we did our job, and it falls back to the contractor.

Obviously all this became hypothetical, since the boss didn't want to bother with taking on the job after being asked that question. Perhaps we would have never seen any issues besides what the city caught.

What do you guys think?

 

[dik]

I've done it, but don't like it. Only if, Observed 'other things' are not threatening. You can do two separate reports as different reports; the one report is strictly to address the AHJ concerns. If other life threatening situations become an issue, then you are obligated to stipulate those, if there is a serious concern. It's like walking on ice... good luck.

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

 

[hokie66]

Your boss made the right decision. A contractor asking for two reports is like an accountant keeping two sets of books, one of which is only for the tax man. Dodgy.

 

[XR250]

I mentioned that if we see other structural issues that were not noted by the city, we will have to note them down on the report too

I visit job-sites frequently. Right or wrong, I go in with blinders on and limit my scope in the report. If i see something that is life threatening, I would inform the contractor and put it in the report, but as a general rule, no. I imagine my competitor down the street is doing it the same. I have a family to feed.

 

[BAretired]

Right or wrong, I go in with blinders on and limit my scope in the report. If i see something that is life threatening, I would inform the contractor and put it in the report, but as a general rule, no.

You are doing precisely what the code of ethics requires you to do. Take a bow.

BA

 

[dik]

Yup... good comment.

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

 

[Settingsun]

I also suspect the worst, but also leave open the possibility the contractor just doesn't want to open a can of worms unnecessarily. Could easily move one step forward and two backwards dealing with an authority.

 

[phamENG]

I'll throw my hat in with the single report crowd.

Whether the contractor wants to avoid a can of worms with the AHJ or not, that's the AHJ's job. If they are really making life difficult for everyone, impeding development, and not doing their job - they can be replaced. There's a lot of money in construction/development, and the industry has moved city councils on issues before. (Not saying I like that it takes a bunch of money to move the needle, but let's face it - that's how the world tends to work.) Trying to hide something from the AHJ in the name of "doing it right" would be laughable if it weren't so shameful.

I'm with XR - call me out for issue X, and issue X is what I'll look at. I'll be careful about what I take pictures of. But if I see something that is obviously wrong, I'm not going to unsee it and ethically I can't ignore it. It's going in the report.

 

[XR250]

Let me clarify... Something has to be really f'ed up for me to put it in the AHJ report. ( I usually want to continue to work for these contractors). If it is something that is obviously wrong and no one is going to get killed, but serviceability issues may arise, I'll mention it to the contractor and let him decide if he wants advice. Examples of this are undersized ridges, vaulted ceilings without balloon framed gable ends etc. Let the flames begin.

 

[ALK2415]

Engineers are the same everywhere
i want sell myself cause i have kids to feed !
wrong is wrong [please don't justify it to him and try to twist the clear picture]
two reports is WRONG !!!
you could bear the weight of upper BOSS by following his instructions and do it blindly [say he enforced me to do it], but he will not be hold accountable for your doings

 

[phamENG]

My line isn't as far to the strength failure line as XR - but then again maybe it is, but we have to deal with slightly different things. I've seen several of those interrupted gable ends fail at vaulted ceilings, but I'm a lot closer to the ocean and probably see more unobstructed C and D exposures with higher winds. So that's one that I don't let go.

 

[phamENG]

Engineers are the same everywhere

I think you mean people are the same everywhere. Sure, as engineers we try (or should try) to hold ourselves to a higher ethical standard than many, but in the end we're still people and have to grapple with the same needs and desires as the rest of the human race. There are engineers who will help contractors hide mistakes, there are doctors who will write phony prescriptions, there are accountants that will help people evade taxes. No profession is immune to unethical, immoral, and in some cases illegal behavior.

 

[80PercentTruth]

Your firm made the right decision not to publish two reports such that the contractor can't dust the other items under the rug in secret. Advise your client that one report noting all structural deficiencies is required. Don't let the contractor run the show here -- you are the structural engineer after all and there is an ethical obligation to society to uphold.

 

[ALK2415]

In my place they keep twist the the CODEs regulations for few thousands of USD
examples
- soil bearing capacity [to overcome deep foundation cost]
- add additional levels to old buildings [built on 1980-1990] with few building modifications
- building facelift operations [large façade weight]
- cheat in steel reinforcement strength grads [FY, FU, ductility]
- the list keep growing
..
pleasing the CONTRACTOR wont please your mind ! [try few shot to kill the pain ]

 

[Settingsun]

Comparative ethics is fun. Being careful to wear blinkers and frame photos carefully doesn't put you on a taller pony than going in with eyes open but focusing a report on the AHJ issues. It's just a time-shift of when you drew the boundary.

 

[phamENG]

steveh49 - I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "time-shift of when you drew the boundary" but I agree that eyes wide open is better (ethically) than blinders and carefully framing photos. One reason I try to avoid these kinds of projects. Early on I tried to get in with some contractors for consistent work...but these kept coming up. Turns out in that crowd the high horse leads to drawn out arguments and non-payment. So now, on the rare occasions I do this kind of thing, I prefer to work (fairly) for the owner. It's a lot easier to be the guy paid to notice things.


(The photo thing was a lesson from my insurance broker...stories of guys who snapped pictures of what they were looking at but didn't notice they captured a problem in the background they never consciously saw...their insurance had to pay out.)

 

[Settingsun]

Time-shift was just meant to mean deciding not to see anything before visiting the site vs splitting (or not) the report after you saw something you wish you hadn't.

I solve that photo problem by taking photos where you can't make out the element actually being photographed, let alone the background.

 

[phamENG]

Ah, then I don't totally agree with that (at least not in my own practice). I never go into a place deciding I won't see something...but I also don't go looking for extra problems unless I've been given an open ended 'assignment'. If I see one, then I see it and I handle it accordingly.

Though I can see where an unscrupulous person could use it as a "defense."

 

[kipfoot]

If the objective is to follow up on issues the AHJ has noted, then that's what I'd do: "Regarding items x,y, &z, the following are my observations..." If there are other minor things I discussed with a superintendent at the site, then I'd most likely include these in the body of my email, for the record. Most contractors I work with would take care of them because they want to do a good job and don't want problems to follow them afterward.

If there is a significant error that the AHJ missed, then he or she would want to know about it and I'd tell everyone involved. I don't think it's a question of one report or two reports; it's a question of how to best convey information and its relative urgency.

I try to not automatically ascribe bad faith to other parties. An AHJ isn't just trying to make things difficult for the contractor; a contractor does not want an unsafe or poorly built job.

All that said, I don't like to take projects with a very limited scope nor jumping into projects that should have had an engineer to begin with, so I probably would have declined this one, too.

 

[XR250]

My line isn't as far to the strength failure line as XR - but then again maybe it is, but we have to deal with slightly different things. I've seen several of those interrupted gable ends fail at vaulted ceilings, but I'm a lot closer to the ocean and probably see more unobstructed C and D exposures with higher winds. So that's one that I don't let go.

Most houses with vaulted ceilings in my area built more than a decade ago do not have balloon framed gable ends. I have only seen one partial failure and that was during Hurricane Fran. Even today, they continue to be built that way. Same goes for structural ridges. Never seen one fail, but the walls will push out some. Makes sense that you are seeing failures though.