Unhappy Client 6

[BubbaJ]

I recently received an email from an "unhappy" client.

Said "unhappy" client (U.C.) was commenting on a recent set of preliminary drawings which we presented to U.C. at a recent meeting and discussed many of the issues mention ed in the email. Apparently, I did a very poor job of "educating my client."

There were comments such as "I have spoken to several contractors that have been in the business for years because this goes against everything we have ever experienced and they also find the footings not acceptable at all." There is concern that the footings will "roll-over" in the ground. And the list goes on. He is also demanding that an evaluation of my proposed foundation system be reviewed by another PE.

The proposed system is a 30" wide trench on Geopiers. I have used this type of system on other projects with great success and I know it has been used widely. I am confident in my proposed design.

I am looking for opinions on an appropriate response to the email from U.C. This is a delicate situation as the Architect on the project is my business partner. How shall I handle this to at least keep their relationship intact and remain professional? I can think of a lot of response that will do neither.

My fear is not that the review will be negative, but that the owner will not let this go. I feel I am fighting a losing battle here. Please help!

 

[DRC1]

You are.
It is U.C.'s project and his money. I would explain that this is a new technology, Has been widely utilized to reduce foundation costs and that you are cnfident of it and can provide outside review if desired. However, since U.C. seems to feel more comfortable with a more standard design, I would offer to provide such a design. How much you charge for such a design is up to you, but if it not too complicated, I would offer to do it for free. Sometimes spending a few bucks to get out with your skin intact is the best investment you can make.
If I were your client, I would appreciate you going the other mile to find me a way to save me some money, even if I didn't chose to do it. I don't think U.C. is like that. He does not understand it and does not want to understand it. He just wants it built with out a hassel.
So thats what he should get. We must rember we are not our clients

 

[JStephen]

It might help to point out some other contractors that have done this type of work for you and done well.

 

[dik]

Suggest to your client that the work is correct and if HE wants, he can seek a second opinion at HIS cost. Also offer to do a conventional design for him, insisting that the present one is OK and that he pay for the redesign...

Having this sort of client before the project is out of the ground could be interesting... what if he doesn't like the anchor rods <G>...

Dik

 

[BJC]

"I am looking for opinions on an appropriate response to the email from U.C."
You don't respond to an email. Get your back-up, drawings from other projects, the names of people you did the work for and go see U. C. This is not the time for email.

 

[MintJulep]

Apparently, I did a very poor job of "educating my client."

And there is your problem.

You now find yourself in the untenable position of having to provide specific replies to vague questions. Generally a losing battle.

Your best bet is:

Explain to UC that you understand his concern about the design, as it may be outside the experience of those he has consulted with.

Ask the UC to provide a list of specific TECHNICAL questions regarding his vague concerns. (Don't use the word "vague" when talking to UC.)

Prepare a brilliant presentation about the system, including your past projects, and projects that you were not involved in. Explain The advantages of your proposed system, and any drawbacks as well.

Answer each of the UC's quesions.

Offer the requested independant review.

 

[zdas04]

BJC,
Star for that. No pissed-off client was ever mollified by an e-mail. If he opens it at all he'll put his own spin on every one of your words. A battle of e-mails is only won by the attorney's when it really goes bad.

Go see him, a phone call isn't going to be enough either.

David

 

[LHA]

BJC nailed it. In person, followed by minutes on your letterhead. Let me offer a recent example, not related by subject, but conceptually relavant:

I recently bid USD34k to do a stormwater task. Client thought it was too high, threatened to shop it. I said fine. Client got a bid of USD7700, and asked my firm to "revisit" (ie, slash) our numbers. I met with my bosses, explained the level of effort and liability inherent which dictated my price. We held firm, and, I guess, the other firm will get the job...or, maybe not.

Bottom line: you did your best design to the best of your Professional judgement. Stick to it, let "several contractors" do a "bettter" design if they so desire. Then, let the Client hire "several contractors", if he/she desires. Then, when their "better" design fails, maybe you'll bid to fix it...or, maybe not.

Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve

 

[graybeach]

BubbaJ,
Maybe the problem was with your preliminary design. I find that most consultants do a poor job of it because they include too much detail. A preliminary design is supposed to show the proposed type, size, scope and location of the proposed construction work. It is also helpful to include a brief write-up, or type study, stating the reasons for the selections made. A client may have a very good reason for not wanting a certain type of construction, or the client may just need education.

I do not know if this is what you did, but it is very aggrevating when a consultant slaps a bunch of previously used details on a set of preliminary design drawings instead of providing a clear plan for work.

So, perhaps your response should be that you will provide a type study for the foundation, complete with advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. This is something you should have done anyway - it not on paper, in your head at least. You can then have another PE look it over and concur or not.

 

[BubbaJ]

I wasn't insinuating the conversation should continue via email, I am looking for options on how to proceed without further irritating U.C. and setting myself up for a claim.

Our insurance carrier has suggested that U.C. hire the engineer for the second opinion himself. I am still unsure if this path with satiate him or not.

 

[epoisses]

BJC a star for you.

Another one for the sales engineering tips thread: every unhappy customer deserves a visit

 

[BubbaJ]

We are going to see U.C. The "study" is a good idea. If he is uncomfortable with what I have proposed, I will offer to redesign, at no cost, the system he prefers even though it will result in substantially higher construction costs. However, I believe this comes down to a trust issue, he either trusts my knowledge and experience to provide a sound engineered solution, or he doesn't.

Everything with this guy needs to be documented in writing, he has a habit of conveniently forgetting what has previously been discussed. (Not that you shouldn't always do that.) Even so, he likes to "beat a dead horse", so to speak, on many topics.

I want to note I did not just "slap on details" from another project and the client actually commented that there was not possibly enough detail to proceed, even though we told him they were preliminary drawings. He is apparently showing them around like they are a "For Bid" set.

 

[graybeach]

It sounds like your client is the one who does not know the meaning of a preliminary design.

 

[dozer]

BubbaJ,

UC sounds like a hard guy to deal with. I hope when you bid any future work to him you're going to remember the time and frustration he has (and will again) cost you.

 

[sundale]

I would not put much stock into what contractor's say. Namely, every contractor with a pickup truck and a dog always "knows" more about structural engineering than I ever will.

The U.C. has lost trust in your professional opinion; it will be an uphill battle, most likely, to convince him of anything short of gravity is downwards.

I would respectfully suggest to get out of the project (per the terms of your contractual agreement) with as little pain and effort as possible. Redoing the work with "traditional methods" pro-bono might be a good way to go. I would also suggest perhaps declining the next project with U.C. unless you adjust your fee for the probable hassle. I have a "high maintenance client" multiplier I'll apply sometimes. 2.0 is my personal upper bound and I will simply decline the work if it needs to be higher than that...

 

[csd72]

Have you given the UC details of sub-contractors that carry out this type of work. An illustrated web site may be an excellent way to break him in to the possibilities.

If you are confident that you have done an economic design, then you can put you money where your mouth is. Offer to do an alternate conventional design and get the UC to request the builders get quotes for both options. If your option comes in more expensive he gets the additional footing design for free, if yours comes in cheaper he pays you for the additional design and your time spent discussing this.

If it pays off you will have regained his trust.

 

[Ashereng]

BubbaJ,

When I find myself in similar situation to yours, sometimes, even if I am right, I am wrong.

If my client wants a second professional opinion, then I say that I whole heartily support that. I highly recommend that he get another opinion. I have done my job the best I can. I therefore can not do better. Maybe I am right. Maybe someone else has a better solution than I do. Either way, it is his perogative.

If my client wants me to redo my design, then I go back to my contract. If it is cost plus, I hunker down and have at it. If it is lump sum, then he needs to show where I have not met the contractual terms. Not where our preferences differ, but where the contractual terms have not been met. If I have met my contractual obligation, then my company's lawyer will speak with him. If I have not met my contractual obligation, then his company's lawyer will speak with ours I am sure - and I better get at it.

Once a client's trust in you is lost, it is pretty much going to be a lose-lose situation. The best way to start repairing it is takes his side, within the context of the contract.

Good luck.

"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?

 

[csd72]

Heres one site to forward on to your client which has explanitory notes.

http://www.farrellinc.com/geopier-nca.htm

Also worthy of note - the contractors are looking to maximise their profits, therefore they would want to avoid proprietary systems where they get less opportunity for markup. Their comments are biased towards their own profits and not necessarily towards the clients, you have no such bias.

If you can find a subtle way of stating this then it may be worthwhile.

 

[LHA]

Ashereng is correct. This is now a matter of whether your efforts to date have met your obligations. If they have, do not expend more effort without more budget. If they have not, take the hit. Free redesign does NOT, from ywhat you've told us, seem to be warranted.

Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve

 

[BubbaJ]

Well, my Architect and I have a meeting with U.C. this afternoon. I contacted our local Geopier rep. I have a list of similar projects with references of reputable contractors who are experienced with the type of construction we are proposing.

We have put together an outline of the issues we need to discuss. We will see how things pan out.

On the issue of doing "free work", we will have to feel out the client on this one. We are a new and small firm, we will have to weigh the "non-chargeable" rework against how much damage negative comments (true or not)from him could have on the potential for us to get other work in the community.

And on the flipside, we don't want to let our clients walk all over us either. That's why we started our own business.

Thank you all for your opinions and advice.