(October 1, 2026 @ 6pm ET) 40 Minutes of Competence PjM Study Session: Problem Solving - An Expert’s Process for Answering ARE Questions

Join us for our interactive quiz-style 40 Minutes of Competence, where you'll compete against one of our team members to see who can answer the most ARE questions correctly. You may come away with helpful insights about these exams whether your answers are right or wrong.

These study sessions are free and open to all, not just Amber Book subscribers, so join us this Thursday at 6pm ET: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83922907346

You’ll take the first five minutes of class to answer this week's question alone, but if you would like to get a head-start on that, here is the assignment:

A developer hired an architect to design a retail store in the desert southwest. Two years after occupying the store as renters, the tenants began annually subletting a south-facing portion of it yearly to a large commercial tax preparer for “tax season,” December through April.

The architect had hired an assemblage of consultants, including a glazing consultant to help with window design/selection and a MEP engineer to design the HVAC system. After the contract was negotiated and signed, there were value engineering decisions that significantly altered the window design and selection (but none that changed the ventilation); if the architect had objected to the changes, there was now no written record or memory of it. All parties used the traditional set of AIA contracts for the project.

The tax-preparer subletters expressed concern, then outrage, as they discovered that the temperatures in their offices shot up 11 degrees within five minutes when the direct sun shined in, which happened regularly. The tax preparer sued the consultants. All sides agreed that the offices have unusually significant unwanted solar heat gain and ventilation problems. Which of the following statements best describes the legal status of the consultants in the case?

 

A. The consultants are protected in this case because the contracts limit their obligations to the “standard of care”

B. Unlike the architects who offer the “standard of care,” the consultants are legally exposed because they contractually promised to offer their “best skill and attention”

C. The consultants are protected because the tax preparers, as a third party, don’t possess privity

D. Because of the value engineering process that altered the original window selection and design, the glazing consultant is fully-protected; but because there were no after-contract alterations HVAC system, the MEP engineer is legally exposed