Repeat client known to be quite picky on casework and some finsihes, has new project. Will not pay for a full Project Manual so our interiors department has gone with drawings notes.
(don’t like them, but…)
But to set up some leverage and enforcible provisions have gone to an “uneven” format. Casework, for example, has alphabetized listing through triple T (i.e., TTT), while other “sections” are less than 8 paragraphs in length.
Some other finishes like stone tiling, and wood floors are also “oversized”
In places have used “to Owner’s satisfaction” as the standard.
How much does this bother you-- or is there no concern?
“to Owner’s satisfaction” might sound to the sub-bidders like code language for “guess what we want” or “we will make you do whatever we say until it bankrupts you”. Those who don’t object will be the ones who didn’t read it, didn’t recognize it for what it could mean, or didn’t know they had a voice in the bidding process. The Owner may be fortunate enough to end up getting a sub who will try to comply, but if lowest cost is an overriding factor in selection of the awarded sub-bidder then it seems more likely it could instead become a hot issue later. Best case scenario is it will just drive up the price of the bids because of the contingency factors bidders will build in simply because of not knowing the standard they will have to comply with.
I’m twitching just reading it. Good luck and I hope your pay is not tied to the budget of this job. AND I really hope you’re not foing the CA, that poor bugger is doomed!
Repeat client??? If you know this client is “picky” and has “done this before”…why do you continue to “stick your neck out” when you know in all probability it will “get chopped off”? Seems like you’re willing to accept that (relatively increased level of) risk? If so, sounds like you’ve done the best you can with the situation. Keep your fingers crossed, hope for the best, and expect the worst…like you’ve probably done for this client before.
I’d suggest using some kind of recognized standards: AWI Premuim grade, Maple Wood Flooring Association (or whatever the name is - or the association for the wood species), or existing examples that can be viewed by Bidders prior to bids due. The bidders must have an established quality standard in order to submit an intelligent bid.
I think you should be even more vague and ambiguous. Consider adding tried and true phrases such as “in a worklmanlike manner” or “what is not shown in the drawings and not specified, but could unreasonalby be expected, is included” or some such wording.
Times must be tough or this client pays on time. Time to move on.
Mark, what is “foing the CA” or is that a key board error? Is this the same as “shock the monkey”? Could not be you.
Mrs. Javoroski; There are many reference standards included.
Mr. Yancey; Client is also our attorney! Don’t want them fooling around with any more ambiguities than places where we had trouble on their last project.
Shouldn’t an attorney know better? If they do know better, it means they don’t mind taking advantage of others. If they don’t know better, not much of a confidence builder.
Simple use of reference standards seems appropriate when longer specifications are not wanted.
What does your A/E services agreement say about specifications level of detail?
D and F sit next to each other BUT I must say that this job could be the definition of a new word
Foing 'fü-ing \ n 1: the act of performing or executing a complete $%^#ed up mess: ACTION
2 pl a: things that are done or that occur because the (insert party) is an idiot, but they write the checks
b dial: social activities that result in your rethinking your career.
(My apologies the cute n-g character will not show up in the pronunciation guide. Oh well back to work)
I have no issue with drawing notes where different sections are very different lengths. We have a sheet specs master, but we use an outline structure like a regular spec (without 1.01-type numbering). (They’re edited in Word & inserted into Autocad dwg.) We worked hard to pare the sheet specs down to the most critical things for smaller projects. Our architectural woodwork sheet specs section is pretty long, too. On the other hand, the projection screen section is only a couple lines.
There is an old saying about architects not doing work for friends and relatives - maybe we should add one’s attorney.
Who is going to represent you if they sue?
Mr. Matteo; Heaven forbid, but I would assume the firm that carries our professional E&O insurance!
Anony (2 above); Have no idea what contract calls for. All this came down via PM and Dept Head. And yes, attorneys DO know better and I think an inherent part of their work is to take advantage of others.
Attorneys are paid to assert and attain the maximum advantage for their clients, in anticipation that other parties would do likewise in their own interests. It is not an attorney’s job to be even-handed; attorneys know that’s what courts and judges are for – so attorneys can and do “push the envelope” for their clients’ interests. The most one might expect is that an attorney will be “reasonable”–i.e., will limit any overreaching to the extent that is just short of incurring litigation or other costs that would substantially offset the benefit obtained.
In this example, the likelihood of bid padding due to vague requirements or other contingencies is one of those likely offsetting costs to be weighed.
Is the client looking for a complete set of CD drawings or are they looking for more of Schematic/Design Development drawings?
Do they have an experienced contractor on board?
I have done a few projects where the specs were drawing notes and there really was very little Division 00/01 information. It was a small project with a negotiated contractor.
Is a design professional bound to meet the prevailing “standard of care” except when a client specifically requests (or demands) a “substandard” standard of care? Would a client’s specific written and signed instruction to that effect get one off the hook?
Mr. Axt; They are getting full CDs. Project will be bid by limited list of experienced bidder/contractors. Also, we are issuing a bound booklet of the front-end and Div. 01-- full blown as with any project.
Our interiors people love to do these “small” (?} projects with drawings notes and reliance on
“good contractors good faith efforts” (don’t get me going on that)
Mr. Woodburn; I don’t think our standard of care is manipuable and changed by who the client may be. Our charge via the registration laws, to me, is very straight forward. How or will “waivers” mitigate that, I don’t know. My hope is that there is clear, written provision for what we have done here.
Mr. Everding; Do you equate “defective” with short form or drawing note specifications?