Not happy with our architect

Searlait

I'm just looking for opinions as to whether what is going on with our architect is normal!!

My family have been planning a major build for over a year now. Our neighbours got a big extension/re-model to their house a while ago and recommended their architect - our houses are quite similar.

We have a basement which we are extending out at about 75% to make a proper apartment; demolishing one side of our house, and then along with that, we have a good 15 feet to the side, so with the demolished bit and the extra space to the side building a new house. We are also then extending the house out to the back, it will match the size of the neighbours extension.

Its quite a big job, it will end up being two houses, and one apartment.

We consulted with our architect for the first time about 9 months ago - he was quite good initially with ideas - as at first we were just looking to extend and remodel a little bit.

However, he has been very slow to come back with plans, and plans that he has produced he hasn't been familar at times with (suggesting he got a student to do it, which I know is normal, but he never familiarised himself before meeting with us), he's hard to get a hold of, often out of the country/county, seems to have a lot on his plate. It took him a very long time to come up with plans, we practically hounded him to come up with anything!

To date we have paid him €30K - our planning permissions (2) have both been refused (the first one he told us after about two weeks after it had happened, the second one I found out myself on the internet, we informed him.) We really have nothing so far - plans that have been refused, €30K poorer and a lot of waiting for him to produce anything.

Is this normal?

sinnerboy

No - that sounds like a bad service on the face of it .

Did he warn that you were seeking too much - in terms of planning I mean ? What does the planners report say ? ( you have to go ask for this from the LA )

Searlait

The new build has been refused as they say its too big - well, that's what he said they said to him, I've since seen from the Planning Application website that there were loads more issues that he never mentioned to us - things that look from the face of it, that he should have picked up on. I should say that he has met with the Planning Office and they have agreed on the new build in principle, but say it must be re-designed.

The second plans - he was totally confident with these - he said he's never had planning refused and is quite shocked, but reasons seem quite major. We're waiting to meet with him and the planning office this week to see what can be done with this one, but we really were not expecting this one to be refused. Its not extending out past what the neighbours have built, however, it is quite a big build, but its nothing bizarre.

Also, we have been told that the whole lot should cost about €750K all together.

sydthebeat

you have given this guy 30K already for planning :eek:

you seem to be paying absolutely top dollar (and possible above) for a service that, as you have described, is anything but best practice or even good practice.

having two applications refused is a terrible reflection on his understanding of the planning system and its requirements. If it wasnt so serious i would compare it to a professional golfer 3 putting.

He obviously isnt relaying all information to you. the fact that you had to find out some info yourself from the local authority is bad enough, but especially since he seems to be charging you exorbitant fees.

A good architect should be able to design the 'mass and bulk' out of a building, whilst still retaining the desired floor areas and circulation. The fact that you will end up with 2 houses and an apartment on what is essentially a single dwelling site is tricky enough, planning-wise.....

Did they architect suggest the development density, or did you??

muffler

Im not sure as to what the OP hopes to achieve with this thread. 9 months after you consulted with your architect you have had 2 lots of plans prepared and 2 planning applications lodged, processed and decided upon. How long do you think this should take?

Regarding the fees did you ask your architect in advance what his fee would be? Are you thinking maybe that he has overcharged you in some way? As you have paid him money I take it that you were fully aware of this matter otherwise you would have queried it long before now.

Rates of fees will vary from one part of the country to the other and from one architect to the other so its not really possible to state if you have paid a fair or exorbitant fee. Its down to his scale of fees and/or the amount of work involved with your project.

Searlait

I have no way of knowing how long it should take an architect to come up with plans, but it took him nearly 9 months to come up with those plans, we had told him months and months ago what we wanted, nothing too fancy - it took him a very long time to come up with anything.

I fully understand the length of time the planning application and appeals etc take. Its the length of time it took to get to this stage that I'm concerned with.

He has explained that payment will be in seven stages throughout the life of the build - which I understand is a normal practise - but my worry at this stage is if we are point blank unable to continue with this build, we have paid him €30K to come up with plans - is that normal?

Also, is it normal for an architect to take so long to come up with plans? Also, I am concerned with the very sporadic communication from the architect. I totally understand being contactable during office hours, or being away on holidays etc - but this is all moving very slowly.

Mellor

You are sort of contradicting yourself now, you said in that last post that it took 9 months to come up with plans. Which isn't true.

You have already submitted for planning twice, so I imagine the second set were ready after 7 months, (two months for planning twice), so he only worked on the plans for 5 out of 9 months. Doesn't seam very long at all, especially considering its a big job.

Payments may or may not be prorata with work done, as certain periods will involve more work than others, i'm sure you had a rate of fees at the start

Searlait

We have had two seperate sets of plans, for the two seperate buildings, that were sent in together in December. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. In addition, one of the applications was declared invalid as he had forgotten one of the elevations - which delayed it by a another few more weeks.

I'm not trying to pick holes in our architect - I think he's a lovely guy, but we've been waiting a long time. All I want to know is if anyone thinks this is unusual.

Searlait

sydthebeat wrote: »

having two applications refused is a terrible reflection on his understanding of the planning system and its requirements. If it wasnt so serious i would compare it to a professional golfer 3 putting.

He obviously isnt relaying all information to you. the fact that you had to find out some info yourself from the local authority is bad enough, but especially since he seems to be charging you exorbitant fees.

A good architect should be able to design the 'mass and bulk' out of a building, whilst still retaining the desired floor areas and circulation. The fact that you will end up with 2 houses and an apartment on what is essentially a single dwelling site is tricky enough, planning-wise.....

Did they architect suggest the development density, or did you??

We originally wanted to re-model the house, the roof isn't very uniform, ie we have a balcony at the back of the house with no access, amongst others! It started off just trying to re-model, maybe extend. The architect suggested the major plans - we thought it was great, a really good use of space. He always said that planning shouldn't be a problem - for the main house anyway, the new build to the side is quite close to the neighbours, that was the only planning problem we envisaged. We have a good bit of space to the side of our house, it was a former lane way.

kmick

Stop paying the guy money now. Get copies of all the plans if you have not already and go to another architect. There is a suggestion out there that some architects will deliberately include small mistakes to generate fees. Also it sounds like this guy has no interest. These things do take time but it sounds like incompetence and indifference are rife here.

In tandem talk to this guys boss and tell them you are going to sue them for the 30k you have wasted so far. Dont mention you have gone to another architect as that will lose you all leverage. I always say something like 'my brother is a solicitor and he sues people for fun' that will put the willies up them.

Searlait

Its hard to take a big step like that right now - we do want to stick with him, he did a really good job on the house next door. Also, he's his own boss!

I do think if things don't improve he will be forcing us to have a re-think about using him.

sydthebeat

kmick wrote: »

Stop paying the guy money now. Get copies of all the plans if you have not already and go to another architect. There is a suggestion out there that some architects will deliberately include small mistakes to generate fees. Also it sounds like this guy has no interest. These things do take time but it sounds like incompetence and indifference are rife here.

In tandem talk to this guys boss and tell them you are going to sue them for the 30k you have wasted so far. Dont mention you have gone to another architect as that will lose you all leverage. I always say something like 'my brother is a solicitor and he sues people for fun' that will put the willies up them.

absolutely terrible advice!!
there is no reason as yet to turn this into an adversarial situation, and threatening legal action is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

You need to sit down with this guy and air your grievences and concerns. Your main grievence seems to be the lack of communication so tell him so. Its not acceptable to recieve information regarding your planning application from a website (unless of course, he was physical unable to get the info to you).

i think a frank discussion will solve any issues you have.

Searlait

Yeah, its what we're hoping for - hopefully meeting with him tomorrow. It is just down to communication at this stage - his lack of!

I know exactly what people can be like when they don't get up to the minute updates (from working in a solicitor's office), but we've never looked for that kind of thing, just looking to know what's going on. Finding out myself from the internet that we had been refused the second application - and contacting him and him saying he was out of the country for the next while is hard (he was in the country when it was refused), we feel like we're getting no where. I mean we haven't even started building, god knows that will throw up problems naturally, but we just want to start the build!

Mellor

Searlait wrote: »

We have had two seperate sets of plans, for the two seperate buildings, that were sent in together in December. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Sorry, I thought it was two submissions for the same thing. Wasn't the clearest, but that changes it alot.

kmick wrote: »

Stop paying the guy money now. Get copies of all the plans if you have not already and go to another architect. There is a suggestion out there that some architects will deliberately include small mistakes to generate fees. Also it sounds like this guy has no interest. These things do take time but it sounds like incompetence and indifference are rife here.

In tandem talk to this guys boss and tell them you are going to sue them for the 30k you have wasted so far. Dont mention you have gone to another architect as that will lose you all leverage. I always say something like 'my brother is a solicitor and he sues people for fun' that will put the willies up them.

That is possibably the worst advice I have ever heard. Seriously, that is idiotic. I have never heard of anybody including mistakes to generate fees. Fees are normaly based on construction cost anyway. This is speculation based on what exactly?

As for saying you brother sues people for fun. You've been watching too much television. Nobody just goes around suing people (not even in america) and gets what they want. And so you know, you would have a pretty hard case to prove, as the architect provided a service, on the other hand the firms defamation case would be alot easier.

smashey

kmick wrote: »

There is a suggestion out there that some architects will deliberately include small mistakes to generate fees.

Nice generalisation the kmick.

Any chance of proving it?

kmick

I said some. That is not a generalisation. i heard it from an architects mouth. He said it happens.

Jimbo

kmick wrote: »

I said some. That is not a generalisation. i heard it from an architects mouth. He said it happens.

I've heard alot of things from architects mouths, but never that. Do you know how irritating/time consuming/down-heartening getting a planning invalidated is?
Believe me, after working possibly weeks on an application and then having it sent back to you 4 weeks later for not crossing a 't' is not something architects want.

d2ww

Re kmick's advice afaik, the drawings remain the property of the Architect, so you couldn't just bring them to another Architect even if you wanted to.
If he is going by the normal RIAI fee schedule, 30k euro is 35% of total fees, for a total of 85K euro. For that kind of money for a domestic job, you really should be getting a Royals Royce service!!

smashey

jimbo78 wrote: »

I've heard alot of things from architects mouths, but never that. Do you know how irritating/time consuming/down-heartening getting a planning invalidated is?
Believe me, after working possibly weeks on an application and then having it sent back to you 4 weeks later for not crossing a 't' is not something architects want.

Amen to that.

Mellor

kmick wrote: »

I said some. That is not a generalisation. i heard it from an architects mouth. He said it happens.

Well if this "person" said it. I have serious doubts as to weither he is an architect or not. I can't imagien a real architect doing that. Plenty of imposters I suppose.

d2ww wrote: »

RIAI fee schedule, 30k euro is 35% of total fees, for a total of 85K euro. For that kind of money for a domestic job, you really should be getting a Royals Royce service!!

Considering the size of the job, and estimated cost of 750k.
85k total fees is about 11%
This is fairly standard for domestic work. Fee is normally 6-15%, depending on scale

kmick

Mellor wrote: »

Well if this "person" said it. I have serious doubts as to weither he is an architect or not. I can't imagien a real architect doing that. Plenty of imposters I suppose.

You cant imagine any architect being dishonest. Fair man - Architects and Bertie are the only honest men left it seems. I'll leave it at that. The absurdity of the statement speaks volumes.

sydthebeat

The actual theory that an architect can charge more to fix his/her own mistakes is absurd!!!
He/she would do more damage to his reputation and professionalism if mistakes are made, and to suggest extra charges to remedy these mistakes...???.... simply absurd..

All fees should be agreed beforehand, based on either a 'fixed contract price' or a 'per squre m/ft'. There is no advantage in getting an application invalidated, it actually costs the firm more to reproduce the documents.

Kashkai

My only experience of an Architect was not a good one. His initial proposal sounded fantastic, one of those jaw dropping ideas that most people would love to have as their home - in our case, we have a sloping site so he recommended having a step down open plan area with a double height ceiling with mezzanine off this as a study. This sounded great and looked good on his initial draft so we decided to sign a formal contract with him. The next week I got a call from him saying that plan wouldn't work so he'd be submitting an alternate. We were slightly irked as we had engaged him based on his first draft. However, his subsequent drafts got more riduculous one after the other with "gull wing roofs", and corner windows that apexed 16 feet off the ground so we would have as he put it "a design statement". The fact that it did not suit our requirements didn't seem to occur to him. We were very clear in our initial meeting that we wanted 5 bedrooms (2 ensuite) (we have 4 kids so need the space), a large kitchen with utility, large family bathroom, sunroom, playroom, sitting room. All pretty straight forward I would have thought but he gave us 3 bedrooms (no ensuites), small bathroom, small kitchen, no sunroom etc. We wondered at times if he even spoke the same language as us. In the end, I sat down and drafted what we wanted and told him to put it in for planning. He sniffed that it was a "bog standard bungalow" but as he had yet to get any fees from us, he submitted the plan. When he got half his fee at that stage, he buggered off despite us having a contract for him to oversee the build. The RIAI didn't want to know when I called them to complain that he wouldn't honour his contract.

A little rambling post I admit but my point is that just because these people are "professionals" doesn't mean that you will get a professional service.

Dizzyblonde

I have to say this post makes me feel very lucky. We built our house last year and moved in in late November. Our architect was fantastic - we could phone him anytime and he'd discuss anything we wanted (we didn't abuse this which probably helped). He had regular meetings with us and the builders, and the engineers too when needed. He was worth every cent we paid him. I can't imagine building a house with an architect I had no confidence in.
Of course it's probably like anything else and there are cowboys out there too.

Mellor

I am familar with yor situation Properous Dave, and its not a nice one, it is of course a minority, but all the same a lasting impresion I imagine.

As Dizzyblonde said there are cowboys in every line of work, (builders, architects, doctors and scientists). This is a sad truth.

But kmick, suggesting that some architect often include mistakes in work is stupid. It makes no sense and if you knew how fees for this worked then you would see how. An architect will lose money by doing this. Not earn money.

sinnerboy

Kmic , what was said to you has me dumbfounded . I suppose you heard only what was said to you but I have never heard any professional or business person say such a thing . Like a doctor deliberately " half curing" a patient for repeat business ?..... that is the stuff a bad soap operas .

Architects , like any other business or commercial enterprise can only increase their income and ensure a life long career only by doing good work and building up a good reputation .

kmick

As I said before saying that all architects are whiter than snow is patently ridiculous and I have always maintained that it is only some. I can only say again I heard it from an architect. Most people dont have have 85k budgets for architects. When you build a 170k house in mullingar your architect is not making much therefore some may try and increase their fees slightly.

sinnerboy

kmick wrote: »

As I said before saying that all architects are whiter than snow .

with my user name , I would never claim that

Mellor

kmick wrote: »

As I said before saying that all architects are whiter than snow is patently ridiculous and I have always maintained that it is only some. I can only say again I heard it from an architect. Most people dont have have 85k budgets for architects. When you build a 170k house in mullingar your architect is not making much therefore some may try and increase their fees slightly.

You fail to understand that in terms of time invested, fixing mistakes is a less efficient way to earn money.
An architect will earn more if it goes smoothly and gets on to the next job.

Maybe people do this, there are people out there who say they are architects when they aren't. I wouldn't put it past them as generally they haven't a clue anyway.

Toon--soldier

smasheyknowseverything! wrote: »

Nice generalisation the kmick.

Any chance of proving it?

that used to happen in a lot government contracts , hence why a lot came in over budget but the new goverments contrats are designed to eliminate it of course I wouldnt be able to actually completely prove this

sinnerboy

Toon--soldier wrote: »

that used to happen in a lot government contracts , hence why a lot came in over budget but the new goverments contrats are designed to eliminate it of course I wouldnt be able to actually completely prove this

because its not true . contracts run over for many reasons ..... designer building in errors delibratley is not one of them .

how do you earn your living kmic , toon soldier , or any one else happy to freely malign a profession ?

Toon--soldier

sinnerboy wrote: »

because its not true . contracts run over for many reasons ..... designer building in errors delibratley is not one of them .

how do you earn your living kmic , toon soldier , or any one else happy to freely malign a profession ?

im a final year construciton mangement student... I have worked in total 14 months on site and in an office enviroment on different projects varying from national schools to council offices and on other public and private contracts...... how about you?

muffler

Toon--soldier wrote: »

im a final year construciton mangement student... I have worked in total 14 months on site and in an office enviroment on different projects varying from national schools to council offices and on other public and private contracts...... how about you?

In other words you are still learning the ropes.

Would everyone please desist from making speculative comments. This thread is being pulled off topic and the next post had better pull it round again.

dingdong1234567

OP - Get a resolution with your Architect, you do not need the hassel and stress of getting another architect and then sueing the one you sacked. To much money would be involved and the main thing that would suffer would be the BUILD!

It not a nice situation but the best way is to have regular design meetings with the Architect & Builder and monitor what the progress. This will draw out and problems/issues that will effect the build.

lanod2407

A simple question ............ why, in a country where one is seriously put out if the barman suggests that you might pay €3.50 for your pint of stout before it's settled, would one pay an architect (or any other person for that matter ...... before I attract the wrath of the Senator Eoghan Harris brigade out there!) thousands of Euro before the product has been delivered.

By "product" I mean house-plans with planning permission.

And before you say that planning permission is not guaranteed, I'd think that an architect should have a strong working knowledge of what his local audience (Planners) are going to accept or reject, especially when he has had two bites at the cherry??!!

So, why do we fork out thousands for incomplete work?

This is one of the golden rules of self-build - never pay up front, and always hold enough back to make sure the guy comes back to finish it properly and in reasonable time. I always prefer a carrot to a stick!

Kashkai

Thats the best bit of advice on here. We only managed to get our architect to conform to what we wanted (instead of getting his "design statement") because we hadn't paid him anything up to that point. Retaining money until you get what you want is the only way to deal with architects, builders and the like. If we had given in and paid our builder what he wanted, when he wanted it, we'd be still living with my parents while chasing him through the courts to get him to rectify the serious structural problems with the house. I only paid over the final retention sum last week, a full 12 months after the final works were finished. Enough time to spot any more problems that may have arisen.

lanod2407

............ & that's why you're called "Prosperous Dave" !!!!!

smashey

lanod2407 wrote: »

A simple question ............ why, in a country where one is seriously put out if the barman suggests that you might pay €3.50 for your pint of stout before it's settled, would one pay an architect (or any other person for that matter ...... before I attract the wrath of the Senator Eoghan Harris brigade out there!) thousands of Euro before the product has been delivered.

By "product" I mean house-plans with planning permission.

And before you say that planning permission is not guaranteed, I'd think that an architect should have a strong working knowledge of what his local audience (Planners) are going to accept or reject, especially when he has had two bites at the cherry??!!

So, why do we fork out thousands for incomplete work?

This is one of the golden rules of self-build - never pay up front, and always hold enough back to make sure the guy comes back to finish it properly and in reasonable time. I always prefer a carrot to a stick!

Eh, if you went into a bookies and backed the odds on favourite in a race and it didn't win? Would you withold your money from the bookies just in case the result wasn't to your liking?

Mellor

Toon--soldier wrote: »

that used to happen in a lot government contracts , hence why a lot came in over budget but the new goverments contrats are designed to eliminate it of course I wouldnt be able to actually completely prove this

The budget over runs stem from lots of this, designing in flaws is not one.
Son't be silly.
The new contracts are not brought in because of this.

Now back on topic.

lanod2407 wrote: »

A simple question ............ why, in a country where one is seriously put out if the barman suggests that you might pay €3.50 for your pint of stout before it's settled, would one pay an architect (or any other person for that matter ...... before I attract the wrath of the Senator Eoghan Harris brigade out there!) thousands of Euro before the product has been delivered.

By "product" I mean house-plans with planning permission.

Thats a terrible analogy.
Do you know many pubs that allow you to recieve the product before you pay for it (by recieve I mean drink).
Nobody has suggested paying up front in full, if you wish to coment please make yourself familar with the thread.

And before you say that planning permission is not guaranteed, I'd think that an architect should have a strong working knowledge of what his local audience (Planners) are going to accept or reject, especially when he has had two bites at the cherry??!!

Don't assume, some jobs just wont get planning. Precedent can change. Clients input changes. If a client wants something, he gets it, even it is unlikely to get through.



Thread on topic please, or else there is no point keeping it

Mellor

lanod2407 wrote: »

............ & that's why you're called "Prosperous Dave" !!!!!

I imagine its actually because he lives in Prosperous

sydthebeat

lanod2407 wrote: »

A simple question ............ why, in a country where one is seriously put out if the barman suggests that you might pay €3.50 for your pint of stout before it's settled, would one pay an architect (or any other person for that matter ...... before I attract the wrath of the Senator Eoghan Harris brigade out there!) thousands of Euro before the product has been delivered.

By "product" I mean house-plans with planning permission.

And before you say that planning permission is not guaranteed, I'd think that an architect should have a strong working knowledge of what his local audience (Planners) are going to accept or reject, especially when he has had two bites at the cherry??!!

So, why do we fork out thousands for incomplete work?

This is one of the golden rules of self-build - never pay up front, and always hold enough back to make sure the guy comes back to finish it properly and in reasonable time. I always prefer a carrot to a stick!

If you employ an architect to 'obtain' permission then what you've stated is fine, however..... if an architect agreed to such an engagement more fool him/her.

The engagement normally to apply for planning permission, therefore full payment for the planning stage should be received at the point of application.

this is not a reflection on the OPs situation as there are other issues, but I'm just correcting you on your erroneous assumptions.

lanod2407

1. I'm familiar with the thread.
2. My assumptions are not erroneous.

If I contract work to be done, my expectation is that it is fit for purpose.

The thread is full of clues that might indicate that the architect is question was not sufficiently focused on the requirements of the job.

If he was frequently unavailable to meet his clients then this may indicate that he
(a) was under-resourced, or
(b) lacked the required level of customer-focus (that's a novel new concept that appears to be catching on in other countries).

In either case, one wonders how much resource went into the liaison piece with the Planners, especially when the first submission was rejected?? .......... one wonders.

Anyway, I'm not out to alientate anyone on this site , but do feel that we are too often inclined to accept services or products that we're not entirely happy with.

muffler

lanod2407 I can move your rants over to the consumer affairs forum if you wish.

Try posting something constructive or replying to or advising the OP rather than venting your ridiculous "assumptions" here.

Mellor

Ianod2407 wrote:

1. I'm familiar with the thread.
2. My assumptions are not erroneous

On the previous page you asked why should be pay up front before a service is recieved. You suggest that holding back enough is required to ensure work is done.

If you read the whole thread, you would of seen the the OP did not pay fully up front, they have with held most of the fee. This is what you suggest, and is completely standard.
So your rant on being paid first is not relevant to the thread.

Of course it is correct, you should hold back money. But why bring this up, nobody has or would suggest any different.

sinnerboy

lanod2407 wrote: »

The thread is full of clues that might indicate that the architect is question was not sufficiently focused on the requirements of the job.

The thread is based on one side of the story only . IF the op got a bad service then to hell with that architect . But he/she ( the architect ) has had not had a hearing here.

On the face of it based on the one-side-of-the-story IT APPEARS that the OP has had a service falling way short of services I have seen provided .

Either way I hope it all works out for the OP