Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
(OP)
Here is a situation that while I would like to help out, I don't think it is the right thing to do. A client that did not ask me to supervise the foundation construction and went ahead and completed the work without the inspection by the town bldg. inspector, can not get his foundation approved. Supposedly, the inspector wants him to take out the foundation or get a letter from an engineer that everything was done according to the code. This client is now asking me to look at his digital photos and produce that letter.
For this situation and perhaps others, is there any reference guides out there that set the legal or ethical limits on what engineers can do or for that matter, should not do?
Thanks,
For this situation and perhaps others, is there any reference guides out there that set the legal or ethical limits on what engineers can do or for that matter, should not do?
Thanks,






RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
This assumes that you are happy enough to take the entire responsibility for the foundations based on some photos. Which is your call.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
kxa...if you decide to "sign off" on this foundation, be sure the photos represent all that is necessary. It is difficult to get dimensions right in photographic review, and in this case, you have to be concerned about dimensions, particularly cover dimensions. If the foundation has anything other than typical stresses, the other dimensions become more important as well.
Is photographic documentation to such a degree normal with this client or was there some willfull neglect going on that caused him/her to forego the inspection and provide a few photos of some "good" areas hoping to sway you or the inspector?
Lastly, in your letter (if you choose to write one) you MUST qualify what you didn't see. For instance, you can infer that rebar is present everywhere, but you can't assert that it's there. In any case, without regard to the caveats you place in the letter if you decide to write it, you are accepting the validity of this foundation as a licensed professional engineer.
What will their next request be? "Sign off on this building we just finished...Yeah, we know you didn't get to see it built, but here...look at my photos. It's all good!"
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
I assume from the way you describe the individual as 'Client' means you have had professional dealings with them in the past (if not on this project). Why then did they not get the Engineer involved at the construction stage? Do they have something to hide, or am I just being a little paranoid?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Don't set a precedent here where your client thinks they can do it this way all the time. I can hear it now for the next project....."but kxa let's us do it all the time and we have never had a problem."
If all they are giving you is photos, I would require some (possibly invasive) testing in the areas that were not 100% covered by the photos. X-ray, UT, whatever. Your client needs to realize there is a procedure that must be followed here and the engineer is here to help with problems, not take responsibility when the client wants to skip steps / cover something up / beat schedule / etc.
ZCP
www.phoenix-engineer.com
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
There are many cases where that is appropriate. However at times what they are asking the engineer to do violates state registration requirements. For example certifying plans that were prepared by an out of state engineer.
What you do depends on the factors mentioned by others above. Is the builder a regular client, did you desigh the foundations.
I dealt with a similair case recently where the solution was to have a testing lab x-ray a wall to verify the prescence of rebar. In your case a testing lab probably can provide information which you can use to write the requested letter.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Ron's point: Lastly, in your letter (if you choose to write one) you MUST qualify what you didn't see was exactly the thing I was thinking.
You cannot list out some things you see, then list some things you don't see...and then say the whole foundation is fine and meets code. The unseen things are still serious unknowns.
Can you take the contractor's word about what rebar does or does not exist within the concrete? I've never felt that I could.
It may be that your letter (with qualifications per Ron) is all you can do. Whether this is satisfactory to the building inspector or not is up to the building authorities...and not up to you. You can only do and say what you can only do or know.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
The concrete used in the Big Dig was suspect.
I am no civil by any stretch, but can you tell the quality of concrete by digital photo alone?
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
It's perfectly okay to write an engineering report of what you saw, but it should be qualified based on the limit of observation. That's different from writing a letter that everything is okay.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Do you really think its appropriate for the EOR on a project to put such a disclaimer on drawings, as the senior engineer I described did? Kindly elaborate because it seems contradictory to what an EOR is all about.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
I also agree with EddyC that if I put any disclaimer to cover myself, it would render the letter useless if not ridiculous.
One final word, if the town inspector who is a code certified individual is not satisfied by looking at the photos, why should I be.
Again, thanks so much for everybody’s input.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
What this post is concerned with is someone asking an engineer to come in after the fact and take full responsibility for the foundation design.
This isn't something that is possible.
What is possible, is what many of the posters above have recommended, that the engineer can offer to do at least a study of what may be known and report that to the client. What an engineer cannot do (which I think you agree with) is say its all OK.
I'm not suggesting saying its OK with disclaimers. Rather, I'm saying: "here's what we know. here's what we don't know" - and leave it at that. You're correct that this sort of thing may be useless to the owner (he wants a permit after all), but its all a good engineer should do.
This is, pure and simple, a case of someone wanting an engineer to put the monkey on his back and take full responsiblity for "everything" foundation related.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Yes, an EOR must be willing to take responsibility for design/analysis done under his responsible charge.
Was this a modification to an existing structure for which the stability could not be checked given your contracted scope of services? If so, your senior engineer was correct in protecting the liability of the company and his personal liability.
Did the 20k load have any basis? Were there any limitations placed on your services by your client?
There are many reasons to use disclaimers; however, bad engineering is not one of them. I hope that wasn't done in your case. If it was, you are correct to be alarmed.
The issue of the foundation acceptance is not as "black and white" as you have stated, and is a much more common occurrence than you might think. I have had similar requests made of me over the years. My approach is to use the photos as one of several tools to help me check the construction of the foundation. I also use destructive and nondestructive testing to locate rebar, check the compressive strength, and validate physical measurements. Then I will provide a letter stating what I did and what I found. "Approval" is then something that the governing inspection authority may grant based on more information. "Approval" is not something that we, as engineers, have the authority to grant. It sometimes becomes a semantic sparring match, but the semantics are very important once the lawsuits or complaints start.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
True, we all have to work with some limited info at some time and with some assumptions, do our work. In this situation, the home owner is dictating what should be adequate for an engineer to base his decision on and, that is wrong. If he knows better, he shoulden't be coming to us in the first place!!
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
I am faced with similar situations in industrial plants where I may be able to see the foundation / footing, but don't know anything about its insides. What are some possible out of the box solutions.
ZCP
www.phoenix-engineer.com
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
I had a long-time contractor client get mad at me for refusing to believe his word that the foundation was constructed properly. I told him that I might get sued if the foundation had a future problem. I asked him if he would be willing to take a similar chance based on someone's word. He said no.
I always recommended minimal testing to verify size and placement of reinforcing. If the testing was performed by a qualified testing lab, I would consider writing a letter based on the test results. If the testing is not done, no letter.
I would never use the term "certified" in a letter.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Tell him you will be happy to "Stamp the plans", but that's where it ends. What he can do with stamped plans and the inspector is his business alone!
Going the Big Inch!![[worm] worm](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/worm.gif)
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
It sounds like this is a residential project. Could one simply review just the outside dimensions and then calculate to see if the foundation wall and footing work as an unreinforced structure? One would also want to observe the soil conditions. This cannot be done by photos.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Going the Big Inch!![[worm] worm](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/worm.gif)
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Or, just dont do it.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
"The existing thickened edge slab was checked at three locations for the presence of reinforcing steel based on the design by the engineer of record. Using a magnetic locating device, we found the reinforcing steel locations to be consistent with the provided design sketch."
That's it. While compliance can be inferred, there will usually not be a statement of compliance nor an "acceptance" of the slab. Then the EOR can take their report and claim specific reliance and write a letter based on their findings. That's usually sufficient for the rebar gestapo. What that process does is to share the blame and allow finger pointing in the event something goes wrong!
So now we have ample opportunity in the event of a latent problem (or perceived problem...it doesn't have to be real!) for an attorney to bring in the EOR, the testing lab, and the municipality in an effort to squeeze a settlement. Odds are that at least one of the three will have professional liability insurance, maybe more, and they'll settle to keep their defense litigation costs down.
Are we havin' fun yet?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Basically, I would try and tell the guy to "pound sand" but in a gentle non-confrontational way so he doesnt't lose any self esteme.
I think he has violated the ethics of your original professional agreement when you started the project as his design engineer. If he hired you for the project, he should have coordinated with you or someone to do the inspection. If he hired you for the design, he has a design and you can't act on anything you didn't do. In my opinion, he is playing you.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Tell him that your seal and signature is your statement of compliance (it is). Check your state law...you might be precluded from issuing a "Certification". In some states that is not allowed.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
A stamped drawing is a PE's statement that the contents are as good as you can make them, observing all pertinent and governing codes, regulations, legistlations, laws, etc.
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
1. Who can issue such a letter. A code certified person?
2. If a PE designs as per the code, why shouldn't he be able to provide a letter in addition to sealed plans?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
"A stamped drawing is a PE's statement that the contents are as good as you can make them, observing all pertinent and governing codes, regulations, legistlations, laws, etc."
Those two statements actually go beyond what PE seal implies, at least in Texas. Consider the following:
"§ 1001.401. Use of Seal
(b) A plan, specification, plat, or report issued by a license holder for a project to be constructed or used in this state must include the license holder’s seal placed on the document.... A public official of the state or of a political subdivision of the state who is responsible for enforcing laws that affect the practice of engineering may accept a plan, specification, or other related document only if the plan, specification, or other document was prepared by an engineer, as evidenced by the engineer’s seal."
§137.33 Sealing Procedures
(a) The purpose of the engineer’s seal is to assure the user of the engineering product that the work has been performed or directly supervised by the professional engineer named and to delineate the scope of the engineer’s work.
IE, the point of the seal is to show that a certain registered engineer did the work. That being the case, it's assumed the work is in conformance with necessary codes and standard of care, etc. But that's true regardless of whether the seal is on there or not.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
JStephen...you are right; however, the seal is also an attestation of protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the public, the primary function of the Building Code. Further, an engineer is not precluded from deviating from code requirements, although in most instances that would also constitute a deviation from the standard of care so his liability would increase.
Codes are generally written as minimum requirements and apply to engineers, architects, contractors, and the public. Further, the codes are written for general application, so on occasion, specificity is required that the code doesn't address. That's where "engineering judgment" overrides and the engineer's seal trumps the code.
In short, the codes and engineering law are so closely intertwined that in most instances, the seal is going to affirm compliance with either the stated code or engineering validated interpretation and application of such.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
This is, rather, a case where the plans were sealed, but the construction proceeded without the necessary inspections.
Now the inspector is asking the same engineer to look at the foundation and somehow perceive whether it was done in accordance with the original sealed plans and then supply a letter certifying it as such.
Its sort of like two separate engineering tasks, one the design, two the post construction inspection.
I agree 100% that certification letters in addition to the plans is ridiculous. We should never certify a seal.
This is different - certifying construction based on the sealed plans. I also have difficulty (as I've mentioned above) doing this as the engineer would have to do a lot of investigating (local destructive testing and opening of the concrete) to fully be able to certify the constrcution.
In a way - the contractor should be forced to remove the footing if only to emphasise the importance of getting the right observations/inspections done. Let them get away with this now and they'll do it again.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
What would cross my mind is that if you did write the letter, that the inspector could decide to go to the engineering board and file a complaint against you. You would obviously be doing something he feels is not right.
I haven't read this entire thread but we used to put lots of disclaimers on drawings for certain circumstances that we thought justified (existing building situations etc). But after talking with engineers that have been involved in a lot of litigation, I don't think the disclaimers hold water in court. If you make any modifications to something, you are taking a share of responsibility for it.
I guess one example that comes to mind would be building a taller metal building next to an existing lower one that is on adjacent property. I used to see lots of CYA notes on a co-worker's drawings about doing something like this. But if your new design causes 5 feet of snow drift on the lower existing roof, who do you think they are going to come after?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
kxa said: "Well, the client finally got the message that it would be against the law for me to write such a letter." so that apparently is the reason.
As I said above - certifying a sealed set of plans is redundant and ridiculous.
I think the owner just thought a combination of an engineer's letter (of any kind) and a contractor letter saying "hey - I built it per the plans" would fly.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Anyway, when we stamp the plans, aren’t saying that it has been designed to the code? If so, then the letter would be redundant but should also be harmless. If not, and we are not a code certified person, then we could possibly be attesting to something that would have negative ramifications.
My understanding is that only a code certified person has the authority to make such a statement and interpret the code. An engineer’s understanding and use of the code may be different than the specifics of the code but acceptable to a code official (inspector) who, by approving it, makes it official.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Stamping the plans, in my opinion, is really ONLY saying "I state that I am licensed and that I prepared these plans."
There is an implied statement that the plans meet the minimum code provisions (otherwise you'd be in violation of the licensing laws of your jurisdiction).
Your last statement I would tend to disagree with. Many inspectors and "code certified persons", if not most, know the code pretty well, but in the structural arena most of the code provisons are design oriented and beyond what a "code official" knows or understands.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
The question is really whether a PE is authorized to write a letter saying the plans that he has prepared and stamped are in compliance with the code for that state.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
If I was in the position you find yourself, I would not be writing anything.
You have done what you have done, and stamped the drawings as requried. You have done your job.
Your client has not done his, and is trying to "wiggle" his way out of his mistake.
He made a mistake. He should own up and fix it.
Just my thoughts.
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
You stated "Anyway, when we stamp the plans, aren’t saying that it has been designed to the code? If so, then the letter would be redundant but should also be harmless."
It is redundant but not necessarily harmless. In litigation, that second letter would likely constitute a certification of your own design....that's not good. Any perceived deviation from the code or standard of care, no matter how slight, can then get magnified to a negligence claim. Then guess what...you were not only negligent but you certified that you were negligent. Don't do it.
I mention negligence only because it is a very slippery concept and can take on a variety of forms. Your design might be very good and include everything one could imagine to cover the conditions; however, all the owner has to do is find some engineer who disagrees with your approach and interprets the code in a slightly different manner, and the negligence claim will suddenly erupt from a lawyers mouth. It might be completely groundless and false, but you then have to defend it....COSTLY.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
what does your E&O carrier say about this? what does your attorney say about this?
ZCP
www.phoenix-engineer.com
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
I would not write the letter, either.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
The consensus opinion that you do not write a letter certifying the design seems like very sound advice.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
You already know that the building owner is trying to get the Building Inspector to accept the foundation "as is" without a proper inspection. This is an unethical act. Is this client really worth it for you to assist him in his unethical act? I don't think that you will be able to avoid legal responsibilty by writing some cleverly worded letter that fools the building inspector into accepting the foundation and the liability associated with it.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
In this instance, an engineer was involved but the requirement for inspection still apparently stood.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Interestingly, I checked with the code enforcement department and they said there is no such rule that prevents you from producing that letter. I was told basically that it is between you and your client. When I checked with couple of certified code inspectors, I got totally different response.
For those who suggested I run this by my E&O insurance, they did not have a quick answer and asked that I send a a letter discribing the situation so that they can present it to their risk management board for review and decision. If the client still insists I will do that otherwise, I think this issue is over.
Thanks to everbody for input/guidence and support.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
The Code Enforcement group likely would NOT know if there was a rule against such, since in my state it is under the engineering law and code enforcement people typically don't know much about engineering or architectural law. Further, those groups routinely try to get such letters from engineers and they are successful in doing so many times because the engineers are either intimidated by their municipal position or are ignorant of liability and law.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Good point. I did a little search on the subject matter and came accross the following site:
http://www.engineeringlaw.net/
One of the cases shown is "A Condominium Association could maintain an action against an Architect for negligently misrepresenting that the project met the state's minimum building codes, when it did not. The economic loss rule does not bar negligence claims against professionals in Florida, even though the damages are purely economic in nature."
Whether the architect misrepresented it knowingly or not he is liable. Would be good to have a reference book on the rules and regulations. This site certainly helps.
Thanks.
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
Fun in the sun with condos!
Good post...it generated a lot of good discussion. We all learn when that happens!
Thanks,
Ron
RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
1)Comments on disclaimers earlier in the thread.. you never know how good your disclaimer is until your sitting in a court room listening to the lawyers arguing/testing its validity, not a nice place to be.
2) Here, it is the 'Owners" responsibility to retain 'Professionals' to review the design. We offer our services at the time of permit submission and inform them of there duty and tell them basically not to call us after because we can not certify that which we have not seen. It still stunning how many will try though.
3) It takes a long time to build up a good set of clients.