×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws
2

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,

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Ask the inspector if it is OK to sign off based on photos. This has two advantages - if it is not acceptable then the authorities are forewarned, and if it is then you have checked.

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

Greg...good points.  I agree.

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

The thought of approving something from photos sends shivers down my spine.   brrrrrr...

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

Good points above.  Also, what kind of foundation is it?  You must consider final use to see how important every last detail is to verify.  For example, you may not be as concerned about a porch slab as you would be with a highly loaded footing elsewhere.      

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

kxa,
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

I wish I could use the response, get a building inspector to sign off on it.  I work in Minnesota, and it seems very common for building inspectors to ask for a letter from an engineer to put in there files to show everthing is OK.

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

I think its not ethical to "sign off" on this in any way.

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

I agree with RARSWC--in many states, what you are being asked to do is illegal, and if caught, your licensed pulled, you might even be fined. If something bad happens, say the foundation is damaged and the building collapses, you might even be jailed. Personally I would have a problem with this ethically and anyone who asked you to do this would be crossed off the client list as soon as all current projects with said client are completed.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

One more thought.

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

I don't think that there's any way you could look at photos and produce a letter that "everything was done according to code".  You could produce a letter that says "Based on the attached photographs, everything appears to be according to code, but the work was not inspected in progress."  Of course, that might not be adequate to get the building permit, either.

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

Either the foundation is "OK" or it is "not OK". It can't be "OK with disclaimers". All this sounds like what one of the senior engineers did at my current job (He added 20 kips of localized load on a building roof and then put a disclaimer "Not Responsible For Structural Stability of Building" on the PE stamped structural construction drawings.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

EddyC....there's a reason he's your senior engineer.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Ron,

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

(OP)
Thank you all for your responses. Honestly, I did not think I would get so many responses. Looks like we are all pretty much saying the same thing and that is not to do it. This client had the chance to wait for the bldg. inspector and chose to go ahead with the concrete work. He also had the chance to contact me to verify the rebars and the concrete before pouring it and covering up the whole thing. I am sure the town inspector knows that no engineer in the right mind would vouch for the owner's work based on some photos. In fact, he could even turn in the engineer who writes such a letter.

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

Don't do it unless he is your best friend!

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

and has enough money for you to retire in Aruba!

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

EddyC - I can see the point you make about a foundation either being OK or no OK.  But in the situation of the original post, this isn't a case of an Engineer of Record designing a building and then putting out all sorts of disclaimers.

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

EddyC...I don't know all the details of your issue, but disclaimers are routine.

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

(OP)
One note. I was the engineer who designed the foundation but that is where it ended. I was not asked to supervise the work and the inspector never had a chance to verify the steel/concrete placement, etc. It is all covered up now and the client does not want to expose the foudation. All he wants me or the inspector to look at are the photos. I even think the inspector is looking for a way out and wants to hang it on me.

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

Just to continue an interesting topic into a hypothetical........Isn't there some margin in residential foundations? Could you test for rebar in critical areas or possibly load test a critical area?

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've been asked several times to "certify" that the foundation was constructed in accordance with the drawings AFTER the concrete was poured.  sometimes the foundations were designed by me but mostly the foundations were designed by someone else.  I always refuse to write a "certification" letter for something I did not observe.  

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

Sorry to be blunt, but are you nuts or what?

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
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

I agree that, generally, if I did not observe the construction directly, I would not write a letter of certification.

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

In Texas a PE is explicitly prohibited from certify anything that did not take place under his DIRECT supervision.

   Going the Big Inch! worm
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Offer your client a proposal to write a "I'm a PE that looked at your photos, which show that the portions of the foundation shown appear to be similar to the design, but I can't tell for sure" letter, and charge him at least 10 times what the total inspection fees would normally be.

Or, just dont do it.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Hi, I'm just an EIT, but was wondering (as mentioned in some of the post above) if the owner had a testing company come out and do a sound test or x-ray of the foundation to see what the area of steel in the foundation is would any of you stamp off on it?  If it had the minimum steel required and dimensions per IBC Table 1805.4.2 for say a one or two story building.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

If the testing company did the work, then shouldn't they be willing to stamp their own work?

"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

Ashereng...yes, they should be willing to seal their work; however, the report will say something like....

"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

I would tell the guy that I would need additional testing done to verify the location, spacing and size of the reinforcement, and probably cores of the concrete to verify the air content, placement without voids (good vibration, etc.) and strength.  All this would cost a lot of money and you might find someone else to do it for less.

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

(OP)
Well, the client finally got the message that it would be against the law for me to write such a letter. He now wants me to give him another letter. This time he wants the letter to only say that the design/plans were prepared in conformance with the local code. I don't see any problem with that. He is also trying to get a letter from his concrete guy certifying that the he did his part in accordance with my plans. He is hoping the town inspector will buy that.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

kxa...watch it with that second letter.  You've already prepared the plans and specifications, they were submitted to the municipality for review and issuance of permits, and now he wants you to separately state their compliance with local code.  That's implicit when you sign and seal the plans for submittal.  To say it again in a separate letter constitutes a certification.  If there's the slightest deviation, you might have an issue you hadn't intended.

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

(OP)
This is getting to be more complicated than I thought. Thanks Ron. I'll look into it before doing anything.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

I agree with Ron.  your seal and signature on the drawings already attests to satisfying the local code requirements.  why does he need both a set of sealed and signed drawings plus a letter?

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

This also sounds strange to me.

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

(OP)
I am not having much luck finding the part of state law that says I should not be giving a certification letter. I also have the following questions:

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

" your seal and signature on the drawings already attests to satisfying the local code requirements."

"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

kxa...in what state is your project located.

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

again I ask:  why does he need the letter in addition to the sealed and signed drawings?    

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

archeng59 - This isn't a case where an engineer simply supplies a design, seals the plans, and then is asked to add a letter of certification to the plans.

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

Because the inspector wants the engineer to take total responsibility for what was built since he was not able to inspect it.

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

I thought contractors get their licenses, so that they could certify the work is done per plans?

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Contractors get their licenses to keep the guy-in-a-pickup from bidding a million dollar job.  It's not intended as a certification of work done.  (Specialties such as plumbing or electrical may be a bit more knowledge-based).  Some states have contractor licensing laws, some don't, for that matter.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Not sure how big the town is, but if there is a head building official (and not the inspector), then a meeting would be in order.  That way you can find out exactly what building official will require compared with what you can reasonably do.  If all parties are in same room then hopefully something can get resolved.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

JAE, I understand the original dilemma presented in this thread.  but the whole thing changed when kxa's client asked for a letter stating the foundation was designed per code instead of the inspection letter.  maybe I'm missing something here, but just wondering why the client changed their mind.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

archeng59 - yes, I see that once the client understood that the engineer couldn't certify something he didn't see - he then switched and asked for a letter saying that the design was per code.  

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

(OP)
Apparently, the client is now trying to get a letter from me, the concrete guy, the architect and others certifying their work so that the town inspector won’t make him rip everything apart. At least, this is the message I am getting. I offered to talk to the inspector but the client said “not a chance.”

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

kxa,

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

(OP)
I agree that a code official does not or may not understand the engineering aspects of the plans. In fact, they don’t even have to be engineers to get certified. What they say is that they have done a limited review (this is their disclaimer) and that the plans are acceptable.

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

I think we can write such a letter if we want.  I just don't think there is any need.



RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

kxa,

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

kxa...
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

kxa,

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

zcp has a great point about talking to your E&O agent.

I would not write the letter, either.  

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Even when a building department issues permits, and a C of O upon completion of construction, code language similar to IBC Sections 105.4, 110.1, and 110.4 helps protect them from lawsuits. You too should do all that is reasonable to avoid being sued if something goes wrong.

The consensus opinion that you do not write a letter certifying the design seems like very sound advice.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

kxa,

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

What is forcing this construction to be inspected?? If the building doesnt fall into the special inspection or structural observation category I dont think the inspector has grounds to reject the work unless your local residential code requires it.  I would advise your client to put the inspector on the defensive stance and make him provide the specific code requirements stating where the work must be inspected.  Very true it is unethical for you to write a letter stating it was done correctly, but if its just a simple footing, most of the times the contractor is taking the liability for any problems that occur in the future.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

Loui1 - most residential construction falls under city inspection guidelines where foundation, framing, electrical, etc. inspections are required at the various stages of construction.  This is so because for one reason residential buildings aren't engineered so the higher level of inspection by cities is called for.

In this instance, an engineer was involved but the requirement for inspection still apparently stood.

RE: Engineering Ethics, Regulations and Laws

(OP)
Well, I certainly did not think I would get so many responses. And, I must say, with one voice. I was never asked before to certify my own work and did not feel I should do it here. I made it clear to the client that if he wants another set of sealed and signed plans I can provide hime with that but not the letter he was asking for. I think he got the message.

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

kxa...one last comment!..

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

(OP)
Ron,

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

kxa...yes, that was my point exactly.  Here, we as engineers can also be sued individually for corporate work, so both the corporation and the individual can be separately liable.  That makes a corporate indemnity very important in employment decisions!

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

yes a good post, something we constantly come across ... clients (yes the people who pay us money) asking for a helping hand when they try to save some money by eliminating our inspection services once they have the building permit.  Couple of other comments though
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.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources