Tag Archives: terminology

Substitutions on a construction project — a Specification Writer responds

Posted on by

In response to the post about Substitute Materials on a construction project, Phil Kabza explains how his company, SpecGuy, handles tracking of all such materials on a project.specguy

Phil writes:

Excellent and important topic, about which there is much confusion among design professionals and contractors. We try to maintain definitions for:

  • Pre-bid requests for prior approval of proposed comparable products where products are named in the specifications
  • True pre-bid substitution requests that present an alternate type of product from that specified (ie., not “comparable” but perhaps suitable)
  • Post-award requests for approval of proposed comparable products “for convenience” of the contractor with or without credit to the owner
  • Post-award requests for approval of proposed comparable products “forcause” due to unavailability, failure to meet specified warranty, etc.
  • Submittal of non-complying products “to see if we can get away with it.”

Public agencies, owners, and design firms all have different approaches to each of the above, which requires the specifier to carefully define their terms in Division 00 Document “Procurement Substitution Procedures” and “Division 01 Section “Substitution Procedures,” as well as establishing consistency across the several hundred specification sections.

Thanks, Phil, for your boots on the ground perspective of how to consistently handle the specifications when handling substitute materials or products.

Your turn.  Thoughts or Phil or me?  Share below, or shoot me an email.

Substitute Materials — what are your duties? what are your risks? (law note)

Posted on by

In managing a project as the design professional, you are called upon to wear many hats.  One of those hats is that of material specifier and, at times, substitute material approver.  What are your duties in looking at substitute materials?many hard hats

As always, the legal answer is “it depends”.  In part, it will depend on your role on the project and what, specifically, the contract says.  However, at its most basic, you can be sued for accepting an out of spec substitute material.  This is so even if you believed the spec met requirements based on information that the contractor gave you.  So, tread carefully in this area.

Do not assume any information that the contractor presents to you– take the time to research for yourself, call the manufacturer, and otherwise ensure that the product will work.

If the substitute is okay but will mean the Owner will get something a little different, make sure the Owner knows that and has approved the change.  Needless to say, get this consent in writing, as it could be evidence one day.

While you may not ultimately be held responsible for approving a substitute that is inferior, you don’t need the headache of finding that out from a Court.  Save your time, and your stomach lining, and make sure it’s correct and documented on the front end.

Have you been called upon to approve questionable substitute materials?  How did you research whether they would work or not?  Share in the comments below or drop me an email.

Are we having fun yet? Construction in a post-COVID world (law note)

Posted on by

Remember how I said to never assume?  Yeah, about that……   even when you plan for failures, mistakes, and other problems, sometimes things get so outside the realm of what you considered that it can leave your construction project spinning.  Take, as a random example, a world-wide pandemic that shuts down supply chains, shuts down job sites, and limits the labor pool.  Just as an example.

What does construction law say about pandemics?  They fall under an “Act of God” that you may have read about in your contracts, or in the contracts of the contractors working your projects.  An “Act of God” is an event that is not foreseeable, and as such not something the parties could have anticipated when they drafted the contract.  Acts of God generally excuse a party’s failure– for example, a contractor’s failure to complete the project on time can be excused when an “act of God” has occurred. 

By now, you’ve dealt with the practical fall out, one way or another.  Many projects no longer made financial sense for your clients.  Others may have been modified, reduced in scope, or had substitute materials put in place.

What do you, as an architect or engineer, do now, faced with the potential for further shut downs, supply chain issues, and other COVID variants?  The short answer is to give yourself options and assume changes will be needed to your own scope of work on each project.  Consider:

  1.  If the project needs to be re-designed to account for shortages, can that be an additional service that you get paid for?
  2. If the project requires substitute products, how many of those are part of your basic service, or is there a point at which you should get paid hourly for researching, reviewing, and approving substitutes?
  3. If the project takes a lot longer than anticipated to complete, whether due to government shut downs, labor issues, or supply chain problems– can you get paid increased contract administration fees?  And, is there a contract provision that allows you to increase your hourly rate after X number of months, to reflect inflation?

These are some of the ways that you, as a designer, can protect yourselves from ongoing delays, and make sure you are not tied to a project without a way to recoup your extra costs.

Thoughts?  Questions?   Share what’s worked for you or what you’d like to learn more about in the comment section below.

 

 

Certificates of Merit for NC lawsuits against engineers and architects? (still no)(law note)

Posted on by

Certificates of Merit  are documents intended to show that a true issue exists with a professional’s work, prior to that person being sued.  While North Carolina does require that a person suing a medical provider first have the matter reviewed by a professional (and attest to that in the Complaint), there is no requirement for any review prior to a lawsuit against an architect, engineer, or surveyor.  Thus, anyone can file a lawsuit against an engineer/architect/surveyor without first having their case eyeballed reviewed by another professional. magnifying glass

Over the years, there have been attempts at adding a Certificate of Merit requirement to design professional lawsuits.  See, for example, examples here: from 2005; from 2007;  from 2011; and from 2013.

While many states do have Certificates of Merit for lawsuits against licensed design professionals, North Carolina, to date, does not.  This is a shame, because having a professional review a potential error *before* a party spends the time and money to file a lawsuit, can only help eliminate frivolous, merit-less claims.   To win a lawsuit against a design professional, a party will need to have an expert testify that they were negligent.  The Certificate of Merit just ensures that there truly is a valid dispute before a design professional’s name and reputation get pulled into expensive, perhaps unnecessary, litigation.

Would a requirement for a Certificate of Merit eliminate unnecessary claims?  Perhaps not.  But, it gives all parties an honest “first look” at the alleged design errors before the lawyers sharpen their claws begin filing their lawsuits.

Share your thoughts on such certificates in the comments, below.

 

Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

Posted on by

sword to defendRecently a client asked me to review a contract for his Firm.  The Owner, who had prepared the draft, had inserted a rather stringent “duty to defend” clause.

As I told my client, a duty to defend clause is not a good idea for a couple of reasons.  First, if you agree to provide a defense, what that means is that you are footing the bill for the Owner if the Owner is sued by another party.  Think about that for a minute.  You are paying legal fees for someone else’s legal defense.  You may or may not be able to direct the litigation or have a say in who is hired.  Can you say open check book?

Secondly, and more importantly, the duty to defend is almost never insurable.  What that means is that your professional liability carrier will not be footing the bill—your Firm will be doing it.  This is not a case of adding the Owner as an additional insured, so do not confuse the two.  Agreeing to a duty to defend is an extremely burdensome, and potentially costly, mistake.

What do you do if your Owner is insisting on such a clause?  Try to get the clause written out of the contract, period.  Point out to your Owner that it is not covered by your professional errors  & omissions policy.  That alone is often enough to get Owners to agree.  You might also contact your insurance carrier/agent to add weight to your statement.  They can point to the provisions in the policy that will likely exclude coverage.

If the Owner will not strike the provision, then what?  Seriously think about whether this is a risk you can afford to take.   What type of project is it?   Do you know the contractor and other parties—are they reputable and qualified?  And most importantly, is the profit to your Firm such to justify the potential risk.  Usually, the answer to the last question is no.

Have you seen a “duty to defend” in an Owner contract?  Did you agree to it?  Share in the comments below, or drop me an email.

Photo: (c) MatthiasKabel via Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license.