Hello All,

Could you offer some advice on a scenario that has the potential to get quite nasty!!

Me and the other half (sadly not Mia Sara!) are looking at getting an extension on the back of the house.

We arranged an appt with a recommended architect to give us some ideas about what is doable and what isnt and also to secure the planning permission.

We got the planning permission fine, but we have just received an invoice that contains work for the planning permission (which we’re fine with) and the second line is for the services of a structural engineer and his quotation for steel work.

What we cant understand is why he has got an engineer to do work on our behalf when a) we hadn’t agreed on any final plans or configuration and b) the architect did not mention anything about extra fees for a structural engineer – both me and the other half (not Sloane Peterson!) have no recollection of this.

I fully understand that nobody works for free and we’re absolutely fine with paying for the planning permission work, but not the engineers work.

I’ve tried having a chat with the guy and his response is simply’i told you’. We went through our notes and there is nothing that remotely eludes to the involvement of an engineer at this stage. He claims that if we don’t pay, we’ll receive a solicitors letter within a week and it will escalate from there!

Any advice?

The Architect should have run the appointment of a Structural Engineer past you, before appointing them. I’m not even sure why this would be needed for a planning application, anyway.

We always clearly state that our fees don’t include specialist consultant fees, and we always ensure it is the Client who appoints them, rather than us.

Do you have a written appointment document, and agreement with the architect which sets out the scope of services?
There’s a series of things – but assuming that they are a registered architect you should write to them and outline your complaint. Depending upon what happens next then you should contact the ARB and formally complain. Get your complaint letter to your architect sent this week, and reference the complaints procedure of the ARB – they’re taking a very strong approach to this kind of thing and are striking off the register those complaints upheld.
Hopefully you can get it sorted out reasonably amicably without further pain (fingers crossed).

Did you receive calculations and a drawing for the steelwork for building control submission? If not then what has the engineer done to earn the fee?

Also if not written down I’m not sure how the architect has a leg to stand on with regard to additional services. Might be one for RIBA or ARB if they’re a registered architect…

I’m not even sure why this would be needed for a planning application, anyway.

Is he in the process of doing you some drawings for building control purposes, or just planning? He’d need the calcs for the former, certainly.

Depends what terms you’ve agreed with the architect, really.

Having said that, unless you’re planning to change the specs completely, you will need those calcs at some point.

Hmmm – both architects we’ve used in the last few years have needed to bring in a structural engineer but this has been pretty evident in schedule of works and always had complete transparency in regards to fees from the outset.

As above – it sounds like he’s happy to escalate things pretty quickly from his end so if he’s registered I’d get onto ARB/RIBA. If he’s not and there’s no mention of 3rd party costs in any paperwork then I’d let him try and chase you for them – IANAL but if you’ve not appointed them and no contract between you and the 3rd party, not sure how you can be held liable if it’s not in any agreements about passing on additional fees…

Thanks folks, as always this place delivers!! 🙂

I’m going to try and have another chat with him and see where that gets me and if he’s still being unreasonable in my opinion then i’ll have chat with the board he belongs to.

The RIBA is spineless, the ARB is the registration body set up by Act of Parliament. And I’m both registered with the ARB and a member of the RIBA….

I’m not even sure why this would be needed for a planning application, anyway.

You don’t, Planning Permission and Building Control are totally separate and independent, you can quite easily get PP for something BC won’t approve etc.

Footflaps: It was a rhetorical question. As someone who has worked for an architect’s practice for the last 10 years, I’m familiar with the process

Havign had a couple of pretty bad architect experiences I would at least try and understand exactly what the engineer did, and why then unpick the contract with the architect to see if it included third party services. In reality he should have told you if he was engaging them and for how much. Was the basis of fees flat or on an agreed percentage of costs etc ?

I just completed an extension which required SE involvement, but until such time as PP was granted, it wasn’t even a consideration to talk to one. Sounds like he’s trying it on. I’d ask who the SE is and where are the calcs etc, before even thinking about paying him.

It may have been that the Architect required preliminary advice from a structural Engineer in order to determine if the proposed scheme was ‘do-able’ from an engineering perspective.

However the Architect should really have explained to you that this was happening and it should all be outlined in the scope of services as already said above. Getting an Engineer involved at Planning stage on a house extension is unusual.

Re-reading your original message it actually sounds like the works have proceeded past Planning stage and have got into detail design stage if such things as quoting for steelworks are being talked about?

You don’t, Planning Permission and Building Control are totally separate and independent, you can quite easily get PP for something BC won’t approve etc.

But looked at the other way, if there was a question on the likelihood of it being able to get BC approval, or of being prohibitively expensive to do so, would you not want a reasonable and pragmatic architect to say: “hang on before we file for planning and introduce both expense and time into the process, are we happy that this concept and cost are going to be achievable? lets get the S.E. to take at least a “look see” and check if there is a blatant issue.” Certainly thats the sort of professional help I would expect from my experience architect, and unless I as the client had been explicit that this project was just kicking ideas around then if the cost is going to be incurred anyway then its a question of timing not additional cost.

Obviously should have been agreed up front. Doesn’t sound like the relationship is particularly constructive if there are threats of legal action.

Is your architect independent or working for a company?
I had a not dissimilar sitauation with a solicitor with £5000 of extra and unagreed charges on a £700 estimate.
When I got the legal threats I initially wrote to the senior partner with a simple ultimatum to accept the £700 and inform me it was all resolved or I would take it to the regulator. I included the previous correspondence.
I got an immediate or next day acceptance.

The architect may require professional advice at the planning stage to establish what’s doable to an existing property. This saves you designing something that is either too expensive or technically difficult to achieve further down the line. If that’s the case pay up, he was doing his job properly.

Have you seen the calcs and are they actually any use to you?

From your description this sounds very odd. I am an Architect and regularly do extensions for people. At a planning stage there would be no real need to appoint a structural engineer unless its for advice (normally gained informally at planning stage but only if theres a possibility of an issue, as if the project proceeds, the engineer will be involved at building control approvals stage and will fee accordingly but no engineer i know would proceed with any actual work without an agreed fee proposal directly with you the client.
So either this isn’t just for planning and is for Building Control Approval and there has been some misunderstanding and you haven’t understood the appointment or you are being misled and the Architect hasn’t communicated with you correctly. They need to have confirmed their appointment with you including advising you of the requirement of other consultants in writing before proceeding. If the latter is the case and they haven’t informed you, challenge it or don’t pay and take it up with the ARB. This is assuming they are an actual Architect and not someone calling themselves one!

The architect may require professional advice at the planning stage to establish what’s doable to an existing property. This saves you designing something that is either too expensive or technically difficult to achieve further down the line. If that’s the case pay up, he was doing his job properly.

True. However, the Architect should not have incurred additional costs before agreeing it with the Client first.

So once you get planning you have to go through building control?

We’ve had 3 structural pieces of work done in our house but all of it done through permitted developments so BC only

The relationship seemed fine and then this! It was all very friendly…..and now with a bit of retrospect a little too casual!

Wrightyson, we’ve had nothing other than the confirmation of the PP and a couple of rough sketches of the sort of thing that can be done. It was once we had the PP that we were looking at progressing things. I’m still stumped how you can get an engineer involved when nothing has been agreed let alone the design of the extension…..is it spanning the entire length of the house? is it not? How far is it coming out? Surely you need to have a design / concept agreed before you proceed?

I’ve since sent a strongly worded email! 🙂

Weren’t there more than a couple of rough sketches accompanying your planning application?

I’m slightly confused because you seem to think that nothing about the design has been agreed even though you’ve been through planning. Any major variations to the plans you submitted would need to be re-approved.

Perhaps there has been a communication failure, and the architect believes the basic structure of the building is settled, you are moving towards BC approval, at which point you would expect to see a structural engineer appointed so more detailed plans based on those approved by planning can be drawn up.

What I wuld say is… you’re going to need calcs at some point; for BC and for, well , the build!

Is the price for these calcs good?

Is it worth getting upset about?

Of course, if you haven’t finalised the design, then you could say “I’ll pay that cost, but when the designs are finsihed..”

DrP

IF it’s the Architect doing their due diligence, then it shouldn’t be anything to fall out over. Just speak to them and say you wish you were told about these extra costs, first. As others have said, if the SE has produced something that is tangible, that you can use as part of the BC application, then you’re going to have to pay for it eventually.

On a few projects, we’ve consulted a structural engineer at feasibility stage, but it’s always been done on a “you give us a basic appraisal for free and we’ll throw you in the mix to get the main project”-type arrangement. I certainly wouldn’t have incurred any additional costs without running it past the Client, first.

Is it anything fancy for the extension, or just a typical knock the back kitchen wall out and stick a beam across the gap?

Maybe if it was a bit left field I’d accept a SE doing calcs. A basic steel across an opening doesn’t need checking for planning permission, you’ll just need him in to work out the steel size when the building starts.

15 years ago no need for a se unless lots of steel or fancy roofs but now almost any extension some as small as 2.5m x 2.5 m cloakroom toilet seem to need calculations. I’ve even seen engineer adding ridiculous spec to decking 2 feet off the ground, cant think why. Domestic garage floors with a252 and 150mm conc. They certainly add lots to the costing not all engineers but one or two

Whatever you settle on, I’d suggest the trust is gone and you need a new architect to proceed. A friend of mine had a similar situation with an architect near Chester, and it didn’t end well.
Good luck.

Ferris you need to explain more as what you have said doesn’t make sense.

On one hand you say your architect has just produced a couple of rough sketches and nothing is set design wise regards the extension. However you seem to suggest that your architect has obtained planning approval for you which would involve producing a number of drawings which you then have to build in accordance with.

What exactly have you got planning permission to build?

Whether it was reasonable for the architect to involve a structural engineer isn’t the point; it may well have been, but he should have told you in writing if he though it necessary.

…take it up with the ARB. This is assuming they are an actual Architect and not someone calling themselves one!

No, take it up with the ARB anyway. It’s illegal to call yourself an architect if you’re not registered, and my understanding is that the ARB’s role includes policing that.