Why is this an additional service?

Comments

5 comments

  • Avatar
    Michelle Harris

    B101 4.2.2.2

    Responses to RFIs where information is in the CDs

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Gang Chen

    That is correct.

    Gang Chen, Author, Architect, LEED AP BD+C (GreenExamEducation.com)

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    David Kaplan

    Its a technicality. All it means is that, technically speaking, if we're asked to answer questions that are clearly in our drawings, you're basically wasting your time and we should be paid for that time.

    This is an example of a situation where in real practice, unless you're a jerk, you'd probably never have the gall to tell your client "i want a change order for this time." If it became an annoyance and was happening all the time- ok then, maybe. However, for the purposes of this exam, put that commentary aside and just know that we are allowed to request a viable change order in this instance.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Mark Baker

    Correct, get paid for your time.

    Mark, Archizam

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Kathryn O'Regan

    I had a nightmare of a CA job where this kept happening.  The contractor kept shot-gunning off emails (like 4 in the span of an hour) with questions that were very clearly already laid out somewhere in the contract documents.  Rather than asking the client for a CO after the first few RFIs, I did keep them informed of the contractor's disorganization and the time I was spending to clarify.  Luckily, because the contract docs were clear, my responses didn't take much time. There were a few occasions where the contractor's response to my answer was "Oops, yeah, was thinking of a different job!" The contractor ended up walking off the job on the basis of delayed payment from the owner (we had proof of bank draft; the municipality's bank sent out the check, but he had not yet gotten it in the mail, though previous payments were mailed without problem...) and I ended up sending all my documentation of excessive RFIs to the municipality's lawyer when they notified the contractor's surety.  At that point, the client was going to find another contractor and I asked to adjust my fee to finish out CA due to essentially restarting the project, and they were amenable to that, having witnessed the contractor's behavior.  (I actually used EJCDC docs instead of AIA.)

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk