Architect fees for extension

[onq]

I find the % thing off-putting because it's an un-known. But I see the logic from an architect's perspective...usually extensions are more expensive because they are more complex, requiring more work for the architect. A client constantly changing their mind impacts the architect in a fixed price agreement . What I'd like is to agree a fixed price based on the agreed plans. The architect should provide an estimated cost to any changes after that - then the client can decide if they really want that change.

Many architects have done just this, and its not so much the actual changes that eat up your fee income as it is the discussions about all *possible* changes with the client.
I assess the client and raise my initial fee proposal to reflect my estimation if the client seems very demanding - I have seldom over-estimated my additional costs.

Extensions can be more complex than a new build, because of the marrying in of structure, space and services.
And the snagging on extensions tends to be much more onerous than on new builds for some reason.
Given the square footage basis, extensions are more expensive than new builds.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Complainer]

In relation to your photographer, he is entitled to copyright his work, as I am my drawings. If you're using his work for personal enjoyment and not commercial gain, I see no reason why he would charge you for each use. If OTOH you are using the work repeatedly for commercial gain, he is entitled to charge for its use according to my understanding of how that profession works.

That's how the profession USED to work, when clients where foolish and generous enough to go along with restrictive practices. When I engage a photographer, the contract specifies unlimited perpetual licence to use the photographs. I pay the photographer for his work, and I get to use the products in any way I like. This requirement is clearly specified up-front, and the photographer can set his fee accordingly.

Some photographers (particularly older ones) get a bit snooty about this. The smart photographers do job, deliver the goods, and take the money and run.

In relation to your photographer, he is entitled to copyright his work, as I am my drawings. If you're using his work for personal enjoyment and not commercial gain, I see no reason why he would charge you for each use. If OTOH you are using the work repeatedly for commercial gain, he is entitled to charge for its use according to my understanding of how that profession works.

B)

The issue isn't cost per se, but rather why it occurred and whether the increase incurred extra complexity in the design of the built work leading to extra design work, as well as when the extra work was incurred.

Simply put, a change from lead to zinc roof at initial briefing stages costs the client nothing - such variations are allowed for at this stage.

If this occurred at statutory approval stage on a mid range project the notation on up to a dozen drawings would need to be revised - a relatively minor cost that most archtiects would absorb.

But let's say this change occurred after tenders had been accepted, contractors and subcontractors appointed, contracts for supply of materials issued, specifications and BoQ agreed in writing, and perhaps someone appointed under the artisans and tradesman's clause to carry out the roofing work.

This requires changes to finished drawings, agreed specifations and issued contract documents.

There is a revised specification, and on a large job there are possibly hundreds of finished drawings requiring to be annotated, including A4 booklets of details requiring revision and co-ordination between the documents, variations to the B of Q, an amended health and safety file, the determination of a craftsman's contract with possible legal implications and the appointment of another craftsman.

This is no longer loose change Complainer, and this revision is a relatively simple one of substituting one sheet roofing material for another.

The cost of making these changes need proper accounting procedures to be put in place in the archtiects office, they can be quantified and the addition fees charged to the client on a charge out rate reflecting the cost of work done- but these costs are not straighforward.

If the practice is a busy practice [oh, wishful thinking!] performing such changes may adversely affect the profitability of the office

• if the work needs to be done to a deadline out of hours for example
• where it it so extensive this cannot occur, during business hours in time previously allocated to complete other profitable work
• in all cases there are additional overheads to pay.

These are not "tricks" to get money out of people, they are the costs of doing business and I have yet to be involved in a job where changes did not occur at every stage in the development.
On an extension I did recently the roof changed from pitched to flat after the contractor was appointed.

Percentage fees accounts for some of the changes - at the early stages, but not all of them.

So the issue is changes and their timing, as much as the percentage fee basis, when it comes to a job starting out and remaining profitable.

There is no "dodging" here Complainer - I hope after reading this you will agree that designing buildings is different to most other design disciplines in terms of scale, complexity and how costs are arrived at and variations dealt with and some of the reasons are given above.

I have quite a lot to say about your response, but in the interests of clarity, let me focus on one particular issue. Perhaps my original question wasn't clear.

I thinking about a scenario where the price increases during the build project for reasons that require no involvement or extra work by the architect. Let's face it, price increases during a build project are more the norm than the exception. So where an architect has quoted a % fee, and the builder's price increases during the project (for reasons that require NO extra work by the architect), what happens to the architect's fee at the end of the project?

 

[onq]

That's how the profession USED to work, when clients where foolish and generous enough to go along with restrictive practices. When I engage a photographer, the contract specifies unlimited perpetual licence to use the photographs. I pay the photographer for his work, and I get to use the products in any way I like. This requirement is clearly specified up-front, and the photographer can set his fee accordingly.

Some photographers (particularly older ones) get a bit snooty about this. The smart photographers do job, deliver the goods, and take the money and run.

"Yield to me the copyright to your work or you don't get the contract"?

Do you give the photographer the credit for his work on the reproductions?

Depending on your answer I'll have a lot more to say on this.

I have quite a lot to say about your response, but in the interests of clarity, let me focus on one particular issue. Perhaps my original question wasn't clear.

I thinking about a scenario where the price increases during the build project for reasons that require no involvement or extra work by the architect. Let's face it, price increases during a build project are more the norm than the exception. So where an architect has quoted a % fee, and the builder's price increases during the project (for reasons that require NO extra work by the architect), what happens to the architect's fee at the end of the project?

If the fee is quoted in a particular year for say, a five year project, it is advisable that fees should be index-linked to reflect the cost of production of the work in later years.

Otherwise, if this is simply a local short term price increase affecting materials only, then no, I personally don't raise my fees.

That having been said, in one particular project that spanned five years we agreed a monthly retainer and stuck to it.

Other firms may do it differently.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Complainer]

"Yield to me the copyright to your work or you don't get the contract"?

Do you give the photographer the credit for his work on the reproductions?

Depending on your answer I'll have a lot more to say on this.

Close enough. The photographer retains the copyright by law. The tender and the contract specify that the photographer grants the payer unlimited perpetual rights to use the photographs in any medium, and the photographer agrees not to use the photos for any other purpose without written permission.

And no, the photographer is not credit for his work. Neither are the colleagues who write the document. Nor the proof-reader who proofs it. Nor the designer who designs it. Nor the van-driver who delivers it. What's so special about photographers?

If the fee is quoted in a particular year for say, a five year project, it is advisable that fees should be index-linked to reflect the cost of production of the work in later years.

Otherwise, if this is simply a local short term price increase affecting materials only, then no, I personally don't raise my fees.

That having been said, in one particular project that spanned five years we agreed a monthly retainer and stuck to it.

Other firms may do it differently.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm wondering if most other firms take the same approach. There is also the issue of the impact at design stage. If the architect's fee is based on a % of the final cost, there is certainly a temptation to gild the lily, or design in features that result in increased costs. I certainly wouldn't retain any professional advisor on that kind of contract.

 

[onq]

Close enough. The photographer retains the copyright by law. The tender and the contract specify that the photographer grants the payer unlimited perpetual rights to use the photographs in any medium, and the photographer agrees not to use the photos for any other purpose without written permission.

And no, the photographer is not credit for his work. Neither are the colleagues who write the document. Nor the proof-reader who proofs it. Nor the designer who designs it. Nor the van-driver who delivers it. What's so special about photographers?

Professionals are credited for the work they do on the fly sheet of a publication.
How else will people know who to go to for such excellent photographs?

Thanks for the clarification. I'm wondering if most other firms take the same approach. There is also the issue of the impact at design stage. If the architect's fee is based on a % of the final cost, there is certainly a temptation to gild the lily, or design in features that result in increased costs. I certainly wouldn't retain any professional advisor on that kind of contract.

You're very welcom, Complainer.

It seems to me that someone working from first principles has spun this out to an unsupportable degree.

Yes, you may get someone seeking high standards of material and workmanship, knowing that this will reflect on a higher fee.
But you'd have to be a pretty clueless client not to see that for what it is, Complainer.
The client sets the brief, the QS reports to the design team on costs and the client is free to peruse all the documents on which a cost estimate is done.
If you didn't spot the solid gold taps in the specification more fool you.

But equally, if you agreed the general standard of the specification before the design work standard [and you are at all times free ot do this] then the architect was obliged ot take this into account.
When I say "obliged" I don't mean a waffly "obliged" I mean this is part of his duty of care once he accepts your instruction - to do right by you and not artificially inflate the price to invoke higher fees for his own benefit.

It is precisely to police unscrupulous behaviour like this that the Building Control Act 2007 requres all architectsto be registered.
It remains to be seen how effective this is, but equally having worked as an architect for over twenty years in Ireland I resent the implication that any architect would hike up the spec to increase fees.

This has nothing to do with their moral standing per se - its just the way the building industry is.
Having worked at the hard face of commercial design I can tell you that neither commercial not private house clients are uninformed and you would be shown the door if they even suspected you would try that on.

Nor do I hear anyone here actually citing cases where this has occurred - more a "its nonayur business" attitude coupled with an unwillingness to retain building professionals to save money, thinking they can "do it all" themselves.
It was partly to try and better inform people what they were getting into if thye did that which prompted me to write the Self-Build FAQ.

And I wrote it for free, Complainer, just as all my advice here is for free - percentages aren't in it!

But in general, there are levelling drifts in prices for work and many of hte percentage fee agreements are done on the basis of industry-standard costings for similar kinds of buildings, something along the lines of the Brude Shaw Handbook [q.v.]

You've seen this levelling drift here, with a reasonable price for good work on private dwellings falling within a range either side of €100 per sq.ft.
It stands to reason that if your house is coming in much over €150 per sq.ft. then you need to be looking at the cost estimates again to see where the higher prices arise.
You'd be mad to agree to a percentage based on an inflated price.

But the corollary is also true.
If your house is coming in at €65 per square foot because some builder is cutting his throat to get the work, don't expect your architect to agree to a fee based on such a low cost base.
Come to think of it, don't expect the builder to stay in business very long either.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Complainer]

Professionals are credited for the work they do on the fly sheet of a publication.
How else will people know who to go to for such excellent photographs?

So now I'm supposed to give him free advertising space in my publication so he can get more business? No chance, I'm afraid.

You're very welcom, Complainer.

It seems to me that someone working from first principles has spun this out to an unsupportable degree.

Yes, you may get someone seeking high standards of material and workmanship, knowing that this will reflect on a higher fee.
But you'd have to be a pretty clueless client not to see that for what it is, Complainer.
The client sets the brief, the QS reports to the design team on costs and the client is free to peruse all the documents on which a cost estimate is done.
If you didn't spot the solid gold taps in the specification more fool you.

But equally, if you agreed the general standard of the specification before the design work standard [and you are at all times free ot do this] then the architect was obliged ot take this into account.
When I say "obliged" I don't mean a waffly "obliged" I mean this is part of his duty of care once he accepts your instruction - to do right by you and not artificially inflate the price to invoke higher fees for his own benefit.

It is precisely to police unscrupulous behaviour like this that the Building Control Act 2007 requres all architectsto be registered.
It remains to be seen how effective this is, but equally having worked as an architect for over twenty years in Ireland I resent the implication that any architect would hike up the spec to increase fees.

This has nothing to do with their moral standing per se - its just the way the building industry is.
Having worked at the hard face of commercial design I can tell you that neither commercial not private house clients are uninformed and you would be shown the door if they even suspected you would try that on.

Nor do I hear anyone here actually citing cases where this has occurred - more a "its nonayur business" attitude coupled with an unwillingness to retain building professionals to save money, thinking they can "do it all" themselves.
It was partly to try and better inform people what they were getting into if thye did that which prompted me to write the Self-Build FAQ.

And I wrote it for free, Complainer, just as all my advice here is for free - percentages aren't in it!

But in general, there are levelling drifts in prices for work and many of hte percentage fee agreements are done on the basis of industry-standard costings for similar kinds of buildings, something along the lines of the Brude Shaw Handbook [q.v.]

You've seen this levelling drift here, with a reasonable price for good work on private dwellings falling within a range either side of €100 per sq.ft.
It stands to reason that if your house is coming in much over €150 per sq.ft. then you need to be looking at the cost estimates again to see where the higher prices arise.
You'd be mad to agree to a percentage based on an inflated price.

But the corollary is also true.
If your house is coming in at €65 per square foot because some builder is cutting his throat to get the work, don't expect your architect to agree to a fee based on such a low cost base.
Come to think of it, don't expect the builder to stay in business very long either.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

Thanks for the clarifications. Perhaps you're right, and the client should be able to spot any attempts to bump up the spec/fee. I'm just wondering why the client should have to be worried about this kind of vigilance. Why not just a straight fixed fee amount?

 

[onq]

Complainer,

Its hard enough to get work without clients being unwilling to give references in publications which use it. It is customary practice to give credit for cerative or graphic work and more shame on your photographer for not demanding it from you and on you for being so relucant to give it, never mind offer it - what does it cost you?

As for clients being vigilant and your inference that this shouldn't happen - nonsense, there is a risk of it happening in every profession and every business.
We all have to be vigilant on all fronts otherwise we'll get taken for a ride - and this is more likely, not less likely, in a recession.

If people were vigilant it wouldn't be so easy for prices to be inflated by retailers.
Look at the nonsense that was exposed a couple of Christmases ago [or was it last Christmas] when the Euro and Pound Sterling were near parity and the overcharging in Dublin High Street stores was exposed for all to see.

Professionals have to make money too, and in the building industry - as is now PAINFULLY OBVIOUS - the money you make in the good times has to support you through the lean times.
Bills don't stop and kids still have to be educated in a recession.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Complainer]

Its hard enough to get work without clients being unwilling to give references in publications which use it. It is customary practice to give credit for cerative or graphic work and more shame on your photographer for not demanding it from you and on you for being so relucant to give it, never mind offer it - what does it cost you?

No shame on me at all, at all. Shame on those who blindly follow 'customary' restrictive practices with any professionals. About time we stood up to these professionals. The cost to me is the distraction from the message of my publication - I don't pay the costs of publishing to help people to find photographers. I want to focus people's minds on the core message of my publication. I also need to be fair to ALL the people involved in this publication - why should I credit the photographer, but not credit the designer, the authors, the consultees, the printer, the proof reader and the van driver. They all played key roles in getting the publication into the right hands - why does the photographer get a credit and not the others? For the record, the photographers that I use are very happy to work with me, and happy to come back and quote for repeat business again and again.

You're right indeed that clients need to be vigilant about everything. If it was me, I'd start my vigilance at the charging structure.

 

[onq]

I don't know what kind of publication you are referring to Complainer.
I wouldn't expect it on a newsletter but a good piece of advertising yes and looking at the fly sheets on books shows the rest of the credits.
In fact the introduction to a good buke usually lists the main people who assisted in its production.
I'm not sure where you think you're being ripped off on fees, but when you look at the earning potential of students in college, its nil and many professionals work long years before reaching any kind of decent earning potential.

Your general rant against fees causes some concern.
You seem to be pushing an agenda that isn't based in fact and I'm not going down this road here.
If you want to start a separate thread in an appropriate forum on this, I'll join you there.

But post facts, not opinions, and maybe then we can review like with like, such as the failure of many businesses to drop their prices in a recession.


ONQ.

 

[Complainer]

I don't know what kind of publication you are referring to Complainer.
I wouldn't expect it on a newsletter but a good piece of advertising yes and looking at the fly sheets on books shows the rest of the credits.
In fact the introduction to a good buke usually lists the main people who assisted in its production.

In my case, the publications are booklets - 40-100 pages in size - technical guidance, research reports, standards etc - generally aimed at a professional audience. Some printed in hard-copy, some web only.

Every page costs money, so we're not going to adding pages to thank the world and their wives.

I'm not sure where you think you're being ripped off on fees, but when you look at the earning potential of students in college, its nil and many professionals work long years before reaching any kind of decent earning potential.

Your general rant against fees causes some concern.
You seem to be pushing an agenda that isn't based in fact and I'm not going down this road here.
If you want to start a separate thread in an appropriate forum on this, I'll join you there.

But post facts, not opinions, and maybe then we can review like with like, such as the failure of many businesses to drop their prices in a recession.

I think we've beaten this one to death.

 

[Flower Girl]

I don't understand why complainer doesn't take his/her own photographs in the first place?
Then, issues of copyright would be off the table....

 

[Complainer]

I don't understand why complainer doesn't take his/her own photographs in the first place?

For the same reason as I don't code my own websites, audit my own accounts, represent myself in court, design my own extensions etc - because

a) I recognise the added-value that a professional photographer brings
b) I don't have professional photography equipment
c) I'm a bit too busy with my day job to take time out for all the photography.

 

[Firefly]

For the same reason as I don't code my own websites, audit my own accounts, represent myself in court, design my own extensions etc - because

a) I recognise the added-value that a professional photographer brings
b) I don't have professional photography equipment
c) I'm a bit too busy with my day job to take time out for all the photography.

2 outta 3 ain't bad

 

[JeanKelly]

i have just completed 40sq m two story extension and major internal revoations for a building cost of €43,000, the kit out cost me €18,000, new kitchen,bathroom, tiles, flooring,etc..etc. my archetict charged me a flat rate for drawing up plans and dealing with planning.got my planning within two months. it was eight months later when got finances toghter for building work. he then charged me 187plus vat for site visits which there were three to certify works for staged payments.

no question of mileage he had to travel 25miles, overall cost just short of 2700

Rose these prices sound great. We want to get a two storey extension ([FONT=&quot]approx 31 metres squared per floor)[/FONT] and my husband has found an architect (who's coming out tomorrow, €200 for the initial visit) who is looking for approx €4,000 for just the plans, think the full package to the completion of the build is around €10,000. These prices seem to me crazy compared to what you paid! Id love the contact details of your guy. The cost of your build also looks great too

 

[lowCO2design]

Rose these prices sound great. We want to get a two storey extension ([FONT=&quot]approx 31 metres squared per floor)[/FONT] and my husband has found an architect (who's coming out tomorrow, €200 for the initial visit) who is looking for approx €4,000 for just the plans, think the full package to the completion of the build is around €10,000. These prices seem to me crazy compared to what you paid! Id love the contact details of your guy. The cost of your build also looks great too

hold on a minute
you have to quanitfy what level of service is being provided, what the actual scope of the project is, and what the actual budget is