Hi, We have to instruct an engineer or architect to supervise the construction of our house. From a practical point of view (limited budget) is it better to get an engineer or architect. What I have picked up from reading these treads, is that engineers may be good on the overall structure - will ensure the house is structurally sound but mightn't be too hot on the building regs or attention to detail, while architects will be very good at policing the regulations, but for me a question mark remains over their structural knowledge. Where does each professions expertise lie? Is it preferable, but not essential, to have both an architect and engineer on board - if you have one but not the other what will the compromises be? when I say limited budget, we don't want to get a number of professionals on board unnecessairly as it is just more fees. But if we did get both an engineer and an architect how do the responsibilities fall - maybe the answer to that question will answer all the rest! Is there any risk of both pointing fingers at one another if something goes wrong?
Many thanks in advance...
You've got the general gist of it. Note that whoever you employ, if something goes wrong, you can sue them. That's not great news if you want to avoid the hassle of litigation though. Each professional is required to know where the limit of their competence is. If what you require goes beyond that competence, they must tell you and get another professional in.Hi, We have to instruct an engineer or architect to supervise the construction of our house. From a practical point of view (limited budget) is it better to get an engineer or architect. What I have picked up from reading these treads, is that engineers may be good on the overall structure - will ensure the house is structurally sound but mightn't be too hot on the building regs or attention to detail, while architects will be very good at policing the regulations, but for me a question mark remains over their structural knowledge. Where does each professions expertise lie?
Engineer compromises: depends on how "sophisticated" your design is: more likely to overlook details of your design that make the whole function better or look better. Not likely to be a problem if your design is just a simple "roof tiles with PVC fascias and soffits bungalow" type thing though.Is it preferable, but not essential, to have both an architect and engineer on board - if you have one but not the other what will the compromises be?
It will depend on the contracts of service - ask to have these in writing. As a general rule of thumb (which is dangerous to rely on...), structural stuff is the responsibility of the engineer (foundations, basements, roof trusses, cantilevers) and all residual responsibility will be the responsibility of the architect. If things go completely wrong, your lawyers will be suing both of them anyway.But if we did get both an engineer and an architect how do the responsibilities fall - maybe the answer to that question will answer all the rest!
Yes. In the worst case scenario, this doesn't matter too much as they either sort it out, or you sue them both and let the judge decide.Is there any risk of both pointing fingers at one another if something goes wrong?
If someone hires an architect (and not a structural engineer), will the architect always have to consult with a structural engineer ?
Would it be conceivable that a house could be built with no structural engineer input whatsoever ?
Of course it could be potentially disastrous - you would then have to sue him. It should be reasonably unlikely though.My concern is what if the architect doesn't spot a need for an engineer due to incompetance (or maybe arrogance!!) could the consequences be disastrous?
thanks for that question Louiscribben ... my understanding is that if the architect deems it necessary to get an engineer on board then one is brought into the equation. if he doesn't then he there could be no input from a qualified engineer at all. My concern is what if the architect doesn't spot a need for an engineer due to incompetance (or maybe arrogance!!) could the consequences be disastrous? But I am a complete amature to this so I'm interested in hearing what appropriately qualifed posters have to say.
you will find a lot of engineers in the past sideline as architects and would have knowledge of both the architect who done my plans is and got me planning permission is actually day to day 9-5 an engineer.although the house hasnt been started yet.so maybe you might get someone like that.he might not be as hot on the regs as a fully fledged arch but should know enough to get you by without breaking any major regs
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?