Stamp Removal 2

[IAAWVU05]

Is an engineer allowed to remove his stamp on an existing project even though they have been payed for it?

For example if Engineer A works for Firm B, and they are under contract. Engineer A asks the EIT's to do the design it, after which Engineer A checks it and stamps it. Engineer A then quits Firm B. Firm B then replaces Engineer A with Engineer C. Engineer A requests that his stamp be removed and that Firm B cannot use the design, though most of the work was done by EITs in Firm B,the contract is with Firm B, and Firm B payed Engineer A for his work. Is the work the property of Engineer A or Firm B?

 

[BJC]

"I just checked with the AHJ. Since it is a public document, Engineer A cannot legally pull stamp."
Sounds wrong to me. AHJs deal with how the design and construction comply with applicable codes. City building departments may or may not require stamps for certain projects. Most places I have worked if I went to the city and wanted to pull a stamp they would let me if I had a good reason. Lots of things get built without a stamp.
There are reasons to pull a stamp. As noted above just being POed at your previous employer is not a good one.

Changes I have heard of that would cause me to pull a stamp were 1.) In a "value engineering" move the general contractor changed the HVAC system. that changed the electrical load. 2.) The owners of a building changed the purpose from something like a group home to "Assisted Living" facility. The change didn't change walls etc. but it does require a little more detail in the electrical system.
More than once I have told people wanting me to sign off on a "Value Engineering" proposal to get their own engineer to sign off on it. Value engineering is OK if that's what it is but a lot of time it's a cover for buying cheaper, smaller equipment or doing less.

 

[TDAA]

He can hold you responsible in his own mind, but not in the eyes of the court. He was the one in charge.

 

[dik]

TDAA... I'm not so sure... if someone technical does work and an engineer seals that work, they can still be held liable in a court of law as well as the engineer and the company...

Dik

 

[TheTick]

TDAA is correct. A technician working for a firm is not legally liable.

 

[JAE]

dik, your country may have a different view on this vs. the US. Don't know for sure...but in the US the techs don't ever (that I'm aware of) get sucked into lawsuits.

 

[aardvarkdw]

I believe that is the entire reason for requiring a PE stamp on a drawing, so that there is a person taking responsible charge of the work and certifying that the information is correct. If a product you buy does not live up to the claims on the box, do you go after the company that printed the boxes or the company that makes the product?

David

 

[dik]

JAE: not normally, didn't want to give the impression that techs are generally on the firing line...techs don't often get drawn into this, but you might be surprised if you check with your legal consultant... they can be exposed... in many of the states...

almost anyone can be a target... either individually or jointly...

Dik

 

[GNight]

I quit a job and discovered the company had my stamp on revisions I'd never seen (through contacts at plan check and the local copy house). Took an ugly wrangle to get my name off. Seems to me that unless the job is built the EOR can still be easily replaced and it's not fair to ask the old EOR to be responsible for a changing set of plans he can't review.

 

[TDAA]

I also assumed that the tech / EIT did not do something dihonest. But when it come to being sure the work is complete and accurate, it is on the PE.

 

[IAAWVU05]

Let me clear things up. The work was honest. It was my first time going through what seemed like a library of codes and standards of ASME and others. I checked every specification, thought about the wording of the codes, and ran every calculation through at least twice (even had the other EITs check my work). My worry is there may have been something I missed and therefore the design is somehow flawed. If the flaw is exposed, can the engineer that stamped it hold me responsible in front of a court of law even though he did not check my work as an EIT?

 

[kchayfie]

I'm not in the US so you can't take my word as gospel, but from what I understand of the rules of stamping designs and supervising engineers and so on, unless you took engineer A's stamp and used it on your design without his knowledge, you are not at fault. If Enigneer A tries to pin the blame on you in court, it will highlight his failure to adequately supervise the EITs working for him and his willingness for plan-stamping which I understand is a big breach of ethics. If he succeeds in pulling his stamp and another PE seals the design, that guy is responsible for checking the work you have done and ensuring that you haven't missed anything. Again, he'll be highlighting his own failure to supervise if he tries to pin it on you.

My understanding of how the US PE system works at any rate.

 

[JAE]

The EIT that checked (or really half-checked) the shop drawings of the Hyatt Regency walkways, which collapsed, was not a part of the lawsuits or was not held liable as far as I understand it. The focus was all on the PE engineer of record.

 

[dik]

Likely because he was not a financial target... next time you're talking to your local legal dude... you might enquire.

Dik

 

[BJC]

Dik
Your right. If the teck/EIT won the lottery or inherited a lot of money he would go to the top of the list.