When the architect of record (AOR) is the IDM and a dispute arises, can the architect incur in a conflict of interest with the owner?
When the architect of record (AOR) is the IDM and a dispute arises, can the architect incur in a conflict of interest with the owner?
According to AIA Document A101, unless the parties indicate another individual, the architect will serve as the initial decision-maker. I do not understand the following: the AIA code of ethics dictates that architects must avoid conflicts of interest and must, first of all, protect the public and never assist the client with anything illegal or that could harm the community. So if the contractor is right in the dispute, the architect is likely to lose a client, how should he handle such situations?
Also, if it is not in the contract agreement between the parties, as I understand it, the architect does not have to visit the job site and check if the construction complies with the architectural plans. If the owner requires this service, it should be considered as an additional service.
Thanks in advance for your help.
-
Hi Omar,
I'll answer the second part fist, as per B 101, the Architect should VISIT (not inspect) the site at intervals appropriate to the stages of the construction (not periodical visiting). If the site visit exceeds the amount listed in the contract, it'll be additional services.
For the fist part, yes the architect in fair way and impartially. It's better to lose one client rather than losing the whole practice. As far as I know, some states allow the contractor to file a case directly against the Architect.
Let me know if anything is not clear.
-
Hi Omar,
I personally been part of the Architect and represented as one of the Architect's panel as IDM. Money and time claims from the GC vs the Owner. The AOR is the best person to IDM since he has issued the CD set and Specs Book. Any technical issues were ask thru RFI and responded thru ASI and response to RFI are part of the evidences that the panel will dwell. There are cases when the Owner Rep comes to the site and suggest changes or material substitution which should pass the Architect's review before implementation.
For this particular case, The GC went on a floor material change from ceramic tiles to wood over concrete floor based on emails where both the Architect's team and Owner's reps are part of the circulation. It caused millions of $. But with less or full confirmation from any of the team, GC thought it's ok to change. in Any situation, The Architect should provide any design changes as related to the building, even the owner wants to change it. Its should always pass thru the Architect, reviewed and approved for construction. Now, beyond the design and performance of the building, there are ancillary legal team that provides support counsel to the Architect which is known as The Dispute Resolution Board. https://www.drb.org
-
Interesting. In this particular case, if the GC wait for a CCD or a CO before actually making the change, the disputes may have been avoided.
Similarly, when additional service and extra cost is involved, as an architect, it is better to issue an additional service request to the owner and get the owner’s written authorization before proceeding. This is also a good way to relieve the pressure from the owner, and also the best way to put the ball back in the owner’s hand. If the owner asks, have you started the changes I request? The best answer is we have not received written authorization from you yet, once we get your authorization, we’ll proceed accordingly.
Sometimes, the owner wants to make a change, but he may change his mind once he sees the actual costs.
Gang Chen, Author, Architect, LEED AP BD+C (GreenExamEducation.com)
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments