There are other discrepancies between our reports and recommendations, but the big difference comes down to basically this one thing: The other engineer utilized a table from the code to get a capacity of the concrete foundation wall. The rebar is centered in the wall per the plans, but the other engineer used the table to rebar offset to the interior of the building. This error shows that the wall has significantly more capacity then it really does and they use that extra capacity to justify the wall can handle the forces of being out of plumb. If you use the actual situation there is very little extra capacity to consider the walls being safe in their current condition. The other engineer comes to the final conclusion that the walls are acceptable as they currently stand, but based on false capacity.
I wrote a detailed report back to my client, the buyer and explained all the discrepancies in the report including this one. I was just informed that my client has elected not to move forward with the purchase of this house and he did not ever send the report on to the seller.
Having knowledge of a situation where it is more likely than not that the current configuration is not acceptable to carry the code required minimum loads what is my ethical obligation. The seller/builder has no reason to remediation the situation because he has an engineer willing to sign off on it, but it would appear that the engineer made an error/omission in the report. I would anticipate that the next buyer will not be made aware of the situation because it is not a structural defect to the seller because they have the other engineer's report.
Just looking for some opinions on how to handle this situation and advise if I need to report this, if you would send the information directly to the engineer, to the seller or to village building depart?
Thanks In Advance