Subjective legal terms re: "reasonably capable"?

Comments

3 comments

  • Avatar
    Rebekka O'Melia (Edited )

    Hi Lauren,

    You are getting more detailed than what you probably need for the ARE, but that's *good* because it indicates a higher level of thinking on your part.

    If the architect and owner object to the questionable plumbing contractor, the owner needs to be prepared to pay more for a better sub.  It will be worth paying a bit more for the plumbing to get a better plumbing sub, with less issues.  A better sub probably has more experience, uses better materials, and has better suppliers.

    If the architect researches and finds that the plumbing sub lost his contractor's license, then they aren't qualified, and the contractor will have to find someone else at their own cost.  There are lots of things that could disqualify a sub - no insurance, license revoked, etc.  Bad performance is more difficult to prove unfortunately.

    The Ballast answer is correct.

    Hope this helps!

    Rebekka O'Melia, Registered Architect, NCARB, B. Arch, M. Ed, Step UP, Step Up - Pass the ARE 5.0

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Lauren Printz

    Thanks Rebekka! Thankfully a question of this detail did not appear on the exam at all, but it certainly comes up in my real world experiencing practicing architecture! This makes sense.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Rebekka O'Melia (Edited )

    Glad I could help!

    Rebekka O'Melia, Registered Architect, NCARB, B. Arch, M. Ed, Step UP, Step Up - Pass the ARE 5.0

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk