Disassociating Yourself from a Project 1

[j19]

In an earlier thread (

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=423280)

I described a situation where the contractor did not construct a foundation for a metal building in accordance with the drawings that I had provided to him and the owner. The contractor left out a key element that impacts the design and rather than repair what has been done the owner has decided to take the contractor's word that there will never be any issues with the foundation. This is after I had fully explained to the owner why the missing element is important. I've told the owner that I will be sending him and the local building official a letter stating that I am removing myself from all aspects of the construction of this project, that the project wasn't constructed in accordance with my plans and that I will not accept any responsibility for the foundation's ability to perform satisfactorily, and that I recommend that he hire a P.E. or qualified design professional to provide a remediation plan to correct all deficiencies.

I'm thinking I should keep the letter short and not list the issues with the construction (just in case I miss one). Also not include an engineering explanation on the design or the possible effects that may result due to the missing element. Does this sound like the right thing to do?

Other than what I mentioned, any suggestions on what should or should not be included in the letter? I am planning on sending both letters via certified mail.

 

[WARose]

I'm thinking I should keep the letter short and not list the issues with the construction (just in case I miss one). Also not include an engineering explanation on the design or the possible effects that may result due to the missing element. Does this sound like the right thing to do?

I'd list anything and everything that is a life/safety issue that needs to be addressed. Not only would I notify the owners, local building code people, contractor, etc......I would also get your company's attorneys involved (or one that you routinely lean on for advice).

I haven't looked at the other thread so I don't know what the issue is.....but if it is something that can result in a catastrophic failure at some point.....you need to get it on record (ASAP) that construction blew it.

 

[msquared48]

Make sure the terminology in your letter is to be removed as the EOR or "Engineer of Record" for the foundation for the project.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[oldestguy]

So far you are on the right track. I was in that position some years ago when I was a principle in a consulting firm. We had been getting work from the contractor in the past and knew this action would lose a client. However, in the long it never affected our business work level. Some times you have to bite the bullet. Actually a simple explanation as to the reason for the action is sufficient. If nothing comes of the risk, maybe wasted effort, but one never knows. However, the claims that may occur and the time wasted to fight them is very costly. Insurance coverage also changes dramatically if sued.

 

[rb1957]

list the problems you see and note "not limited to ..."

should you copy the local planning/inspection department ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[Nor Cal SE]

J19, I feel for your difficult situation, and I have never previously had to deal with a construction situation this drastic. Though it's not completely shocking to find a contractor who wants to cut a few corners, I'm more surprised at the owner's lackadaisical attitude toward a scenario that could ultimately cost him a lot of money down the road.

My gut instinct is that the letter should probably contain at least some description of the construction problem. Otherwise, I could see the local building official asking you for at least a few specifics, just to get an idea of whether you're overreacting (I know you are not, but don't know how the building official will react). And in the worst-case future event that there is a problem, I believe having listed a few specifics would further help exonerate yourself from responsibility.

If you're concerned about your letter accidentally missing an issue, you could include lots of phrases such as "including, but not necessarily limited to . . ."

But I'm also interested to hear from others who have been down a similar road.

 

[Teguci]

"On xx/xx/xx I observed blah, which is not in accordance with drawing Sxx. I informed the Owner of this issue on xx/xx and recommended a course of correction. As of this date, the Owner has refused to implement this correction. As the EOR for this project, let it be known that this building is not in conformance with my design, and I recommend that the building department, who is charged with maintaining the standards of construction for this jurisdiction, should take the necessary steps to safeguard the public from this nonconforming construction."

Maybe add - "If the superstructure is erected on this foundation, failure may be sudden and imminent." and "if appropriate corrections are made and observed by me, I will provide additional correspondence to that effect to you in writing."

Copy everyone and go to lunch. I don't consider this removing yourself as EOR. You are letting people know this isn't the building that you are on the record for.

 

[msquared48]

Considering what happened, I would remove myself as the EOR. Definintely. Gives you leverage and makes a strong statement.

I have been there before, but with a different type of project.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[cvg]

its commonly called a non-conformance report. not a reason to remove yourself but definitely raising a big red flag.

https://www.thebalance.com/non-conformance-report-how-to-report-a-quality-issue-844987

http://www.qualityinconstruction.com/2-main-categories-of-ncrs-in-a-construction-site/

 

[BAretired]

I agree with msquared48. You must remove yourself as the EOR. To continue in that role would be problematic.

Your letter should be short and should include the main issue with the work done to date, namely the omission of required tie rods between foundations.

BA

 

[msquared48]

And another point to consider here...

Technically, by ignoring your plans and doing something different without your approval, both the owner and contractor are engaging in the practice of structural engineering and could be censured by your state board if they are not licensed professional or structural engineers.

I would consider also writing your State Board in a separate letter with your letter removing yourself as the EOR attached. Send a copy of the letter to the State Board to the contractor and owner too.

The response should be interesting.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[oldrunner]

It's ok to fire your client. Make sure you have have an attorney for support. I agree with most of the previous replies. Consider reporting the contractor to the contractors board. Went through something like this last summer on a water tank. The owner took the contractors word and I objected. Finally the owner got another engineer to review the foundation bolts and the eight already installed had to be augmented by 16 more.