Failure to Coordinate in Design-Bid-Build case costly mistake

In a recent Business Court decision, an architecture firm was hit with a $2.3+ million judgment stemming from the design and construction of the kitchen exhaust and HVAC ductwork systems in the Charlotte Bobcats Arena.

The project was a “fast track” project, and the architecture firm claimed they were only contracted to provide diagrammatical drawings of the arena’s ductwork system. Subcontractors on the project sued for their cost to perform extra work to remedy alleged design deficiencies. Post-trial relief is currently being sought by the architectural firm (including a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a new trial, or a new trial on the damages issue).

Whether or not such post-trial motions are granted, however, the case raises the very real issue as to architectural responsibility versus contractor coordination responsibility, especially in fast-track projects. This case highlights the risks to architects in failing to make their responsibilities and contractual limitations explicitly clear to both owners and contractors. The case also highlights the need to explicitly review shop drawings for coordination issues that might be present.

The case is Hunt Construction Group Inc. et al. v. City of Charlotte, North Carolina, and Ellerbe Becket Inc., case number 08-11915, in the Mecklenburg County Superior Court.

Happy New Year!

Happy new year, everyone!  May your contracts always be clear, your projects always on time, and your budget always met!

If you haven’t already, now is the time to make a resolution to always review your contracts before you sign them, no matter how familiar you think they look!  You never know what hidden troubles lie therein!  An hour at the start of a contract can save you many hours of frustration later on, whether in construction, a business arrangement, or any other transaction.

Handling Threats of Contract Termination in the Construction Context

The threat of a contract termination, especially one “for cause” as opposed to “for convenience” , is something that strikes terror in the heart of many contractors.  The request by an owner to terminate for cause is something that must be handled carefully by the design professional/contract administrator.  A misstep by any party can cost untoward damages relating to contract termination in the construction context.

 

Managing Changes on the Construction Project

As sure as Santa’s arrival each year, the setting of the sun each night, and the arrival of the bowl games each December, there will be changes to a construction project.   How you manage those changes is important.  If you can properly document delays, changes in scope, or other issues, you can recoup your time and expenses.  If you fail to manage changes well, you are literally throwing money away.  And– if you are a design professional and do not have a good system in place for handling change order requests, you are almost guaranteeing a lawsuit at the end of the project.  Read more on Managing Changes on the construction Project  at this link.

 

Understanding the Construction Contract Before You Sign It

Construction contracts are not all alike.  Though they may familiar AIA form, for example, they often have changes, strikethroughs, and the like which can seriously alter the controlling language.  The time to read and understand your contract is before you sign it.  For a more in-depth look at this issue, refer to my article on construction contract terminology.