|
Sub consultant engagement risks |
Sven
|
#1
22-July-2010
(time:
18:12)
|
Posts:
8
Joined:
11-July-2009
|
Hello,
this question might be quite obvious, but wondered what the biggest risks are by "engaging" sub consultant only on verbal basis (i.e. as part of a report requested by client) based on phone discussion. There'd be obviously no defined terms and condition for Architect and sub consultant. It's getting more interesting if client generated contract is used and wouldn't explicitly list type of sub consultants to be engaged (which AAS does). I believe client wouldn't be obliged to pay if nothing had been agreed in writing including sub consultants fee acceptance beforehand.
Be good to get clear picture of associated risks on this
cheers
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sven Heger
Architectural Graduate
http://www.svenheger.com
|
|
|
|
John Chaplin
|
#2
26-July-2010
(time:
11:49)
|
Moderator
Posts:
4
Joined:
15-June-2009
|
Hi Sven,
As I read it, the main issue of relating to you enquiry is that as a sub consultant you ( the principle consultant ) are repsonsible for payment of the sub consultants fee and would then seek reimbursment under your conditions of engagement as part of your fee.
Of course you also inherit the risk of the sub consultants work, and the client would certainly have grounds for refusing to pay a fee for such work, so you would be wise not to rely on a verbal agreement for such an agreement as you may be putting yourself and your client at risk, , plus with the possibility of not being paid.
regards
John Chaplin
--------------------------------------------------------------
John Chaplin, Director, Chaplin Crooks Architects
|
|
|
|
Richard Goldie
|
#3
26-July-2010
(time:
13:27)
|
Moderator
Posts:
5
Joined:
15-June-2009
|
1) You shouldn’t even think about doing what is mooted. Have the discussion then send a brief email of the points noted. The discussion email needs to cover all pertinent things- scope, fee, programme and terms/form of engagement
2)In your question it is unclear who is engaging the sub consultant, the client has no obligation to pay if you engage the sub. This is a fundamental of the Contract Privity Act.
3) If it were me and the Client 1) asked you to make the call, 2) asked you to engage the consultant verbally, and 3) wants you to use his/her agreement, then my antennae would be on high alert- it is a common ploy of some less than fanatically moral people to contract verbally and then deny, and not pay- in all cases back up in writing..
This is basic business stuff-questions like this shouldn't need to be asked. Insist on clear commercial terms with your client, they'll respect you more in the long-term.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Goldie, Director - Peddle Thorp Architects Auckland
|
|
|
|
John Chaplin
|
#4
26-July-2010
(time:
16:43)
|
Moderator
Posts:
4
Joined:
15-June-2009
|
Sven, my first response to a question on the Grad was a bit guarded, I need to be more to the point with my replies, Richard is right, a verbal agreement is something you should not even consider doing.
--------------------------------------------------------------
John Chaplin, Director, Chaplin Crooks Architects
|
|
|
|
Sven
|
#5
05-August-2010
(time:
12:44)
|
Posts:
8
Joined:
11-July-2009
|
John, Richard
cheers for your responses. I'm absolutly on the same page. Always get agreements in writing. Just wanted to get clarity around greatest risks invloved which you stated.
Thanks a lot
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sven Heger
Architectural Graduate
http://www.svenheger.com
|
|
|