ᐅ Issues with the Architect's Invoice for a Planned Construction Project
Created on: 12 Dec 2021 17:55
W
Wildente
Hello everyone,
The question was whether it would be possible to convert a pigsty with a grain storage into apartments. A contractor came to take a look and recommended an architect, who visited the site with another lady and took the old building documents with her. Later, she called and said that after consulting with the building authority, a building permit (planning permission) would be approved if the exterior appearance remained unchanged and the neighbor raised no objections. However, it turned out that we are currently unable to proceed with the construction project for operational reasons. I informed the architect about this by phone and politely asked if I owed her anything. She replied, "What should I charge for, since nothing was done." After several weeks, she sent back the building documents we had given her – together with an invoice for 5 hours, which I immediately returned in frustration. Yesterday, the invoice arrived again by registered mail, referencing HOAI §§ 1 and 2 in the cover letter, and she demands immediate payment while putting us in default.
Until now, no contractor who was asked to inspect a possible job and provide an offer has ever charged for this. We never received an offer or any other services from the architect; the invoice was the first and only written document. Does half an hour of inspection and a phone call with the building authority to initiate a business relationship justify charging five hours at the HOAI hourly rate? She interpreted my question about whether I owed her anything as an invitation to invoice. What now – I appreciate any advice, or are we left with only a lawyer and court proceedings?
Having had a bad experience, from now on no one will come onto our property without first providing their costs in writing.
Wildente
The question was whether it would be possible to convert a pigsty with a grain storage into apartments. A contractor came to take a look and recommended an architect, who visited the site with another lady and took the old building documents with her. Later, she called and said that after consulting with the building authority, a building permit (planning permission) would be approved if the exterior appearance remained unchanged and the neighbor raised no objections. However, it turned out that we are currently unable to proceed with the construction project for operational reasons. I informed the architect about this by phone and politely asked if I owed her anything. She replied, "What should I charge for, since nothing was done." After several weeks, she sent back the building documents we had given her – together with an invoice for 5 hours, which I immediately returned in frustration. Yesterday, the invoice arrived again by registered mail, referencing HOAI §§ 1 and 2 in the cover letter, and she demands immediate payment while putting us in default.
Until now, no contractor who was asked to inspect a possible job and provide an offer has ever charged for this. We never received an offer or any other services from the architect; the invoice was the first and only written document. Does half an hour of inspection and a phone call with the building authority to initiate a business relationship justify charging five hours at the HOAI hourly rate? She interpreted my question about whether I owed her anything as an invitation to invoice. What now – I appreciate any advice, or are we left with only a lawyer and court proceedings?
Having had a bad experience, from now on no one will come onto our property without first providing their costs in writing.
Wildente
I’m really glad that our architect made it clear before our first meeting that he only provides meaningful information for a fee, and he has more than delivered on that. I appreciate transparency, especially in this sector where in 99% of cases, clients are beginners. I think it’s fair; handling it differently is also perfectly legitimate. Just try going to a notary and asking them for a quick piece of advice 🙂
Gerddieter schrieb:
Your excessively long explanations are actually incorrect. [...] I don’t see any concession here towards @11ant. If you still don’t understand the concession, my explanations must have been “not long enough” :-(
Gerddieter schrieb:
In the end, I agree with you, the original poster should just pay because it saves them nerves. [...] So let’s not put the architect in a generous light – she’s simply demanding the maximum of what she hopes to get. You cannot “agree” with me on that, because I did not come to that conclusion (to give in as a perceived martyr). The architect is also not demanding the “maximum” (and certainly not “what she hopes to get”), but symbolically compensation for (surely more than just) five working hours upon termination of a contract for work, under which she would have been paid much more generously than by the hour if the contract had been fulfilled until the end. In court (given the value in dispute, the first instance would be a regional court requiring legal representation) this would have become a long story, but I won’t subject myself to being scolded again for “excessive length” in further explanations, so you will have to figure that out yourself. I already hinted at this “structural problem” of the legal question, so you only need to look back.
Gerddieter schrieb:
Even if an oral contract was made by engaging the architect, the commission (checking feasibility) does not justify a service according to HOAI – 11ant, you know the phases yourself… which one would it be? The basic evaluation phase would not even have been finished here… An oral contract was indeed made here, and although the original poster did not specify exactly the scope of the work agreed upon, I am at least glad that you correctly identified that this scope must at least have included design phase 1. The fact that it was not completed is inherent in the cancellation or early termination – the completion of phase 1 was omitted not out of ill will by the architect, but at the client’s request. Therefore, her work up to the termination of phase 1 is to be compensated, and the alternative billing by hours is perfectly reasonable and, in my view, if anything, clearly disadvantages her in a middle-ground settlement – the latter is part of what I mean by “generous.” Furthermore, by waiving a contentious dispute, she saves the original poster fees that would in each part (client’s lawyer and court, and opposing lawyer) be many times higher than her claim.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/