Architects fees

diydan

We have received planning and now my architect wants a 10% bonus for having the planning application go through successfully. Is this normal? If so I don't mind paying it but it seems a bit Irish.

RKQ

No, never heard of it.

A Planning application must meet a certain standard, but there is no guarentee that permission will be granted. You simply provide a Professional service in the hope that you are sucessful - you never look for a "bonus". Maybe he/she needs to buy a new Cowboy hat!

topcatcbr

A pat on the back and thanks very much. This is more than i usually get.

muffler

topcatcbr wrote: »

A pat on the back and thanks very much.

If he's looking for a 10% bonus then give him a kick in the hole and a polite "no thanks"

pseudo-tech

Not to be giving away trade secrets but, if I feel that if an application has a risk attached to it, and the client still wants to proceed following your advice about the risk involved, I will offer to charge 80% of my fee for lodging the application and i will gamble with the client for the final 20%. So, if i get a grant of permission i will collect the 20%, if i don't, I forfeit the 20% which shows that i will take an element of the risk myself.

However, if someone is looking for a 10% bonus for receiving planning permission, how much were they willing to give back if they were refused??

DvB

We've always based our fees on the submission of a valid planning application only, sometimes though with a clause inserted allowing for a request for excessive additional information (usually for medium & large scale jobs though) the decision has never been referred to in any of our fee agreements.

Sounds to me like they're chancing their arm looking for a 10% bonus TBH.

sinnerboy

If the situation is exactly is you have posed it - forget it . Most un professional of the architect

IF however

1. the application was actually bogged down either by your own inability to decide what you want with lots and lots of changes / re drawing - work for the architect
2. or by a very tough ride through planning

their MAY be some fairness in looking for compensation . I take that on the chin - win some / lose some

To be clear - I am not suggesting that you were indecisive or that the process was overly difficult .

On the face of it - no bonus .

Slig

An architect should only charge for lodging a valid application. The outcome should have nothing to do with fees.

If granted then grand they will probably get more business from you for construction drawings. If not then their costs in making the application should be covered.

The architect can take no responsibility for the aoutcome of planning, that process is completely out of their hands.

Its like buying a lottery ticket in a shop and the shop keeper coming back for more money from you if you win something.

sydthebeat

the architect should put the same energy into a planning application, whether its a dead cert or a big gamble... it shouldnt matter.

there are situations where you know its going to succeed so you might not have to do a longitudinal section, or perspective etc. but to me its all swings and roundabouts..

first of all, a 'bonus' as described above, to me, suggests the architect will take on any job whatsoever, regardless of the likely outcome... this would be very unscrupulous...

i agree that the architect has no influence on the outcome, other than his/her remit.... but i do believe a good architect will advise the client of the (percentage) likelyhood of success.....

Poor Uncle Tom

Fees should reflect work done. Your architect's work is usually done when a valid application is lodged or additional information is submitted, unless they are working for the LA and granting the permission as well.:D

Of course the RIAI could have introduced a new regime of charges which we don't know about yet.:D

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

the architect should put the same energy into a planning application, whether its a dead cert or a big gamble... it shouldnt matter.

there are situations where you know its going to succeed so you might not have to do a longitudinal section, or perspective etc. but to me its all swings and roundabouts..

first of all, a 'bonus' as described above, to me, suggests the architect will take on any job whatsoever, regardless of the likely outcome... this would be very unscrupulous...

i agree that the architect has no influence on the outcome, other than his/her remit.... but i do believe a good architect will advise the client of the (percentage) likelyhood of success.....

I have to agree with you that the Architect should put equal effort into every project that they are involved in. I have been involved in projects that were obviously priced wrong, where i lost out, but this did not mean a reduction in service.

In relation to an Architect, Engineer, Agent or whoever, taking on any kind of a project regardless of the outcome is quiet common. I have turned down projects that i know would fundamentally fail, to see a local firm lodging an application a couple of months later (that do fail). The client normally comes running back to you to see what can be salvaged. I am also aware of a large practice that instructed one of its technician's to proceed with a planning application because they had too large a fee tied up in the project. This was after the technician received a call from the local planner telling him that under no circumstance should they lodge an application as the local authority would refuse it.

I agree that a good professional will have a strong feeling on the chances of whether or not an application will fail and should advise the client accordingly. As mentioned previously, i do that all the time because i don't like planning refusals (just a personal thing). However, there are different planners who make poor decisions etc etc, but i feel that this excuse is thrown about too often by professionals as a cover for either incompetence or as sydthebeat mentioned unscrupulous behaviour. Where do we go from here?

diydan

Thanks for all the feedback. Good to see that the Celtic Tiger still left some of us with a conscious.

I should have mentioned earlier that the terms of the contract stated that a 10% bonus was due on granting of the application. Something that got lost in the small print. I'm not trying to get out of it. I just wanted to know your thoughts.

I won't feel to happy about handing over the bonus cheque. Neither will the architect when I tell him he lost a family members up coming planning application.

Anyway thanks again.

muffler

diydan wrote: »

I should have mentioned earlier that the terms of the contract stated that a 10% bonus was due on granting of the application.

Yes you should have mentioned this earlier. Im just wondering as to the real reason behind this thread.

Anyhow its locked.