When to pay the Architect

[Markbon]

Hello, I received the specifications etc for building regs on Friday and was told the invoice will follow soon. Im a bit concerned as in my experience building control sometimes want amendments or further information and this particular Architect has been unimpressive and thats being very generous.
So im concerned that I'll have problems and would have preferred to pay once the council are satisfied.
But the question is really when is it normal to pay. If its now then Thats what I'll do. But i'm not confident.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

You pay him when you agreed to pay him as per his appointment. All consultants have different policies, some want payment upfront, some upon submission to the LA some after.

 

[^woody^]

Also confirm your agreement regarding payment for ammendments, there should not be any charges.

 

[Nakajo]

Whether or not there are charges is down to the terms of the appointment.

 

[tony1851]

Also confirm your agreement regarding payment for ammendments, there should not be any charges.

I'm not sure that's reasonable because - as we all know - building inspectors vary widely in how they request amendments to plans. Inspector A might just approve the plans as submitted, while inspector B might ask for reams of nit-picking amendments/notes on identical plans.

So the architect/plan drawer will not know his work-commitment once plans are submitted.

And what if an inspector mis-interprets a regulation, causing the architect more work to prove his design complied? Is he supposed to take the (unnecessary) loss of his time on the chin?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I'm not sure that's reasonable because - as we all know - building inspectors vary widely in how they request amendments to plans. Inspector A might just approve the plans as submitted, while inspector B might ask for reams of nit-picking amendments/notes on identical plans.

So the architect/plan drawer will not know his work-commitment once plans are submitted.

And what if an inspector mis-interprets a regulation, causing the architect more work to prove his design complied? Is he supposed to take the (unnecessary) loss of his time on the chin?

I disagree, for any domestic project only a crap architect or designer would expect anything other than perhaps a few minor items.

 

[^woody^]

I'm not sure that's reasonable because - as we all know - building inspectors vary widely in how they request amendments to plans. Inspector A might just approve the plans as submitted, while inspector B might ask for reams of nit-picking amendments/notes on identical plans.

So the architect/plan drawer will not know his work-commitment once plans are submitted.

And what if an inspector mis-interprets a regulation, causing the architect more work to prove his design complied? Is he supposed to take the (unnecessary) loss of his time on the chin?

I'm with FMT

Typically it's implied that the Architect designs a scheme that will pass building regulations, not chance it and then charge for extras. There should be only clarifications in any case or at worse, some very minor amendments.

There is no need for amended plans if "inspector B" wants changes on site.

 

[Markbon]

Thanks for everyones comments. Ive had another look at the specs and its pretty much straight off a template. If hoping I get the officer ive had a few times and we can work it out as we go.