ᐅ Termination of Collaboration with Architect – Demands Excessive Fees
Created on: 19 Aug 2014 21:56
S
Slintrebla
Hello dear forum members,
Thank you very much for taking the time to help me.
Here is the situation:
My girlfriend and I plan to build a single-family house. Due to strict restrictions from the zoning plan and the shape of the plot, we decided to work with an architect.
In our first meeting, the architect already placed a completed design of a house (which he has probably planned or built before) on our plot. We requested only the following changes to the house:
- extend the house by 0.5m (1.6 feet)
- add a bay window on the west side
- move the guest toilet to an exterior wall
- reduce the size of the basement (garage under the house in the basement) by 0.5m (1.6 feet)
Apart from these changes, we stuck with his standard house model. Just a few additional windows/glass elements were added.
Based on these requested changes, the architect prepared a construction and specification report and drew up the construction contract. All documents and also the email correspondence with the architect contained numerous errors, both formal and factual, which were noticeable even to me as a layperson. Furthermore, the architect did not really accommodate our wishes, and we really had to insist to get a window in the children's bathroom and the guest toilet. Finally, he did not consider our requests for good sound insulation (hollow core doors and not insulated drain pipes—which are standard in social housing) and enclosed rooms (the basement staircase opens directly between the living and dining areas).
For this reason, we involved the Bauherren-Schutzbund (Builder’s Protection Association). They also determined that the pure construction cost of the house is about 271,000€ (without finishing work). The architect wants 320,000€ for the “turnkey” house excluding flooring and painter/plaster work.
After consulting a building expert, we decided to obtain additional offers from other architects. Therefore, we informed the architect that we are not granting him the contract yet but want to gather more offers first. We are of course aware that we have to pay the first architect a fee based on the German HOAI fee structure, which I also communicated in my last email.
Now the architect informed us the following regarding his fee:
“I gladly accept your offer and would like to enter into a contract with you for architectural services for the construction of the single-family house. The minimum commission I accept is HOAI §33 / 34 service phases 1-4. As a basis, I roughly estimate construction costs at 300,000 euros. Architect contract and HOAI (excerpt): Fee basis according to § 35 HOAI: 300,000 euros, fee zone III upper limit (KfW 70 building), 300,000 euros = 49,864 euros, service phases 1-4 according to § 34 = 27% = 13,463.28 euros net + 19% VAT = 16,021.30 euros gross”
So, he wants 16,021.30€ (!!!) as a fee for a standard house (construction description and contract), poor consulting, incomplete documents, and a house that is partly below standard (electronics, insulation, etc.). In my estimation, he probably spent about 40 hours +/- 10 hours on this.
What do you think? I appreciate every response and am happy to provide additional details if it helps clarify the situation.
Best regards
Nils
Thank you very much for taking the time to help me.
Here is the situation:
My girlfriend and I plan to build a single-family house. Due to strict restrictions from the zoning plan and the shape of the plot, we decided to work with an architect.
In our first meeting, the architect already placed a completed design of a house (which he has probably planned or built before) on our plot. We requested only the following changes to the house:
- extend the house by 0.5m (1.6 feet)
- add a bay window on the west side
- move the guest toilet to an exterior wall
- reduce the size of the basement (garage under the house in the basement) by 0.5m (1.6 feet)
Apart from these changes, we stuck with his standard house model. Just a few additional windows/glass elements were added.
Based on these requested changes, the architect prepared a construction and specification report and drew up the construction contract. All documents and also the email correspondence with the architect contained numerous errors, both formal and factual, which were noticeable even to me as a layperson. Furthermore, the architect did not really accommodate our wishes, and we really had to insist to get a window in the children's bathroom and the guest toilet. Finally, he did not consider our requests for good sound insulation (hollow core doors and not insulated drain pipes—which are standard in social housing) and enclosed rooms (the basement staircase opens directly between the living and dining areas).
For this reason, we involved the Bauherren-Schutzbund (Builder’s Protection Association). They also determined that the pure construction cost of the house is about 271,000€ (without finishing work). The architect wants 320,000€ for the “turnkey” house excluding flooring and painter/plaster work.
After consulting a building expert, we decided to obtain additional offers from other architects. Therefore, we informed the architect that we are not granting him the contract yet but want to gather more offers first. We are of course aware that we have to pay the first architect a fee based on the German HOAI fee structure, which I also communicated in my last email.
Now the architect informed us the following regarding his fee:
“I gladly accept your offer and would like to enter into a contract with you for architectural services for the construction of the single-family house. The minimum commission I accept is HOAI §33 / 34 service phases 1-4. As a basis, I roughly estimate construction costs at 300,000 euros. Architect contract and HOAI (excerpt): Fee basis according to § 35 HOAI: 300,000 euros, fee zone III upper limit (KfW 70 building), 300,000 euros = 49,864 euros, service phases 1-4 according to § 34 = 27% = 13,463.28 euros net + 19% VAT = 16,021.30 euros gross”
So, he wants 16,021.30€ (!!!) as a fee for a standard house (construction description and contract), poor consulting, incomplete documents, and a house that is partly below standard (electronics, insulation, etc.). In my estimation, he probably spent about 40 hours +/- 10 hours on this.
What do you think? I appreciate every response and am happy to provide additional details if it helps clarify the situation.
Best regards
Nils
It is not particularly difficult to analyze this issue. The question regarding the formation of the contract might be somewhat tricky, but the original poster informed the architect that the architect’s fee would still be paid even in the case of “non-commissioning.” Essentially, a contractual relationship is established here, which essentially includes termination while maintaining the client’s payment obligation. If I were advising the architect, I would argue along these lines, especially since the architect did provide some services.
I would offer the architect fair compensation for the services rendered and possibly pay half of the fee. In court and at sea... both outcomes are uncertain.
I would offer the architect fair compensation for the services rendered and possibly pay half of the fee. In court and at sea... both outcomes are uncertain.
So, whether it’s the minimum or maximum rate, I believe the architect can choose quite freely. From the description, it doesn’t seem like he has to apply the maximum rate.
The underlying net amount (!) also appears too high compared to his own estimate.
The statement in the email was meant to say that compensation should indeed be provided for work done. However, that doesn’t mean the architect has to go all out, and I’m not sure if he would actually get away with that.
I would try to ask the architect for a candid conversation, explain that the chemistry between you simply isn’t right—which he is probably aware of—and also tell him that you want to pay for his efforts, but fairly for both parties.
The underlying net amount (!) also appears too high compared to his own estimate.
The statement in the email was meant to say that compensation should indeed be provided for work done. However, that doesn’t mean the architect has to go all out, and I’m not sure if he would actually get away with that.
I would try to ask the architect for a candid conversation, explain that the chemistry between you simply isn’t right—which he is probably aware of—and also tell him that you want to pay for his efforts, but fairly for both parties.
S
Slintrebla20 Aug 2014 19:21No, Phase IV (approval phase) did not take place yet. Therefore, it cannot be credited. Regarding Phase III (design planning), this can only be calculated partially since not everything was fully designed.
S
Slintrebla20 Aug 2014 19:24DNL schrieb:
Regarding the minimum or maximum fee, I believe the architect can choose quite freely. From the description, it doesn’t seem like he is required to apply the maximum rate.
The net amount used as a basis (!) also appears to be too high compared to his own estimate.
The statement in the email was meant to indicate that compensation should be provided for efforts made. However, that doesn’t mean the architect should claim the full amount, and I’m not sure he would get away with that.
I would try to have a frank conversation with the architect, explain that the chemistry between you just isn’t right—which he probably realizes—and also tell him that you want to pay for his efforts, but fairly for both parties.That’s exactly what I meant. I just want to compensate the architect for his efforts since we did receive a few tips from him. That would be about 40 hours plus or minus 10 hours, with an hourly rate of around €100. That would be fair and acceptable for both sides. But not €16,000.
Similar topics