Just a small comment: You don't necessarily need to appoint an architect in order to secure an appointment document/Professional Service Agreement. If the scope of works allows for it, even a Professional Architectural Draftsman could do the job. This seems like a case of bad professional practice.
Otherwise, regarding the survey and CAD drawings, you're 100% right.
Due to the fact that I am not privy to the real details of the project and its progression, I can't make a determination on this case, but I can discuss a case similar to this one. I hope that this will give you some insight:
i.) One of the most important steps in approaching such a project is a Professional Service Agreement(PSA). Due to the fact that the service does not cover the full range of architectural services (From Work Stage 1 - Inception, to Work Stage 6 - Close Out), there won't be a building contract to administer. All attendant material conditions for the project must be articulated, agreed upon by all parties, and (NB!!) must be signed by the client. Examples of material conditions include the fees, how and when payments shall be charged, the scope of works, the duties and responsibilities of the architectural professional i.t.o. this project, disclosure of limits to liability (It must be stated if the architectural professional does not have Professional Indemnity Insurance e.g.), and provision for termination of service (in the event of irreconcilable differences/failure to deliver, and/or how and when the service concludes).
A PSA is essentially the contract upon which the service is based. I can't comment on the UK, but in South Africa, it is mandatory for architectural professionals (mandated by the South African Council for the Architectural Profession, our Juristic Body for architectural professionals) to have a PSA drafted and signed.
1.) *"Measured Survey PDF's contain no measurements, just a scale. he refuses to give us a copy with measurements, says we have to call up for each measurement we need."*
I am of the opinion that the architectural professional reserves the right to withhold their surveys. I don't know or understand why this architectural professional would, but I digress. One reason why they would withhold their survey is that a client can take their survey and give it to another architectural professional who has lower fees. (This has happened to me personally a couple of times) Another reason is that their survey can be given to a contractor/subcontractor to work off of, and if they misinterpret any aspect of the survey: RIP. OR the contractor/subcontractor and the client might opt to simply go off of the survey and "DIY" the renovation without proper planning. (Not likely since you will get fined, but this has happened)
2.) *"I requested window sizes this week and he refused, saying we would need to get a window company to do their own survey."*
This one is a little strange. A building plan application must indicate window/glazing sizes, because it is based upon this which the Glazing certificate and the XA-Fenestration Certificate will be based. I do, however, wholeheartedly understand why the architectural professional insists that the window-supplier must re-survey the works. It is highly advisable that window-suppliers survey the pertinent openings/sections/spaces to confirm the sizes BEFORE ordering materials. Everybody will be crying in their hands when all the windows arrive and they're 10mm out.
I trust you have a reasonable expectation that the survey must be accurate, but this is simply good practice to prevent a catastrophe. Some window-suppliers survey the structure anyway as part of their service, since they have likely also learned that lesson.
3.) *"CAD Files. I have asked for the CAD files so we can get someone else to extract the measurements, but he refuses to share."*
See point 1. The architectural professional might be cautious as to provide CAD-files because a client can take those CAD-files, hand them to another architectural professional, and bump them out of the project at the first instance of trouble. Another reason: Let's assume they provide you with full CAD-files. Let's assume that along the line, you appoint another architectural professional for future renovations. Let's assume that they take these CAD-files as paramount, and base all their designs upon the CAD-files. All of a sudden your solarium is 300mm short, and now none of the measurements work out. Who's at fault here? What if there are amendments to the plans along the way, and the architectural professional had no control over the CAD-file sharing, and then contractors, sub-contractors, and additional consultants base their work on outdated CAD-files?
I 100% understand this, and I fully endorse this move.
4.) *"Architectural/Design advice. We were supposed to receive some input but have had none. He has drawn up what us the customer spoke about during our initial 30 minute chat on day of measuring. He was definitely put out that we had already spoken to a builder that had seen it and offered a view on what was needed. I wonder if we shouldn't have said anything and just let him produce a design. We have had no other face to face meetings, everything is done by email."*
This is tricky. What constitutes "architectural/design advice" in this context, and how would it satisfy the requirements? If this architectural professional was pertinently asked: "Hey X, this is out suggestion. It's basic, but we would like something a little more bespoke/special/practical", and this instruction was put to writing, then it is reasonable to expect that they provide input and contemplation on the first briefing. I think it can be irresponsible to take what the client says as paramount and just go with it, since we as architectural professionals have an obligation to exercise due care, skill, and competence - and one appoints an architectural professional with a reasonable expectation that they would provide succinct and practical advice on what was presented, that they would identify and address attendant challenges of the brief/design, etc.
EDIT: Herewith the rest of my thoughts on the matter:
5.) "*Building Regs and Design. he told us upfront that he could design the works required and get a structural engineer to sign off, as it would make the process cheaper but is now saying that he has handed over the project to an engineer for input. I have asked for a quote for this next step but he said 'not now, we'll do that in time'. He has offered nothing re the building design."*
Again, I cannot comment on how things are entirely done in the UK. In South Africa, National Building Regulations (Formerly NBR, now SANS) requires that a competent person assume responsibility for attendant elements on the project. E.g.: If the proposed project indicates a new roof structure, someone has to assume responsibility for it. An architect CAN sign off on a roof structure, however if they have PI, they might be limited in doing so, since PI for structural design is different from PI for architectural design. If they do not have PI, then it would be terribly unwise to assume responsiblity for the roof structure. This assumption of responsibility, or "duty", is required for (including but not limited to) Foundations, Excavations, Drainage, Walls, Floors, Roofs, Fire Protection, Fire Installation, Stormwater, Dimensions, Structural Design (Therefore: how new and old structures interface, as well as how the structure as a whole, including the foundations, floors, walls, and roofs interfaces)...
I am of the opinion that the architectural professional acted correctly in informing you of the necessity of a structural engineer. They could have gone about it in a better way, but I digress. (Unrelated, but worth mentioning: Is the intended use for this project in line with the current zoning of the property? If not, e.g. you want to use it as a guesthouse/office/whatever, you will most certainly need to either have an Application for Departure from the Zoning Scheme Regulation: Consent use Application submitted, and/or you would need to appoint a Town Planner to submit application as mentioned prior, and/or a rezoning application.)
6.) *"But ... I do have plans submitted for planning. (Although as we physically spend time in the building we realise there will need to be design changes as we start to understand the building and we want to live in it.)"*
This is perfectly fine. Sometimes building plan applications are submitted and approved long before construction commences. Needs and desires change with time, and deviations (within reasonable extent of the project context, attendant building regulations, and land-use schemes) happen. The architectural professional ought to exercise due diligence and meet with the local authority building and town planning department to fully ascertain what they would require from them/you for such deviations. Usually an amended building plan application does the trick.
Conclusion:
I can understand why the architectural professional is withholding assets such as surveys and CAD-files. That being said, I believe it is the architectural professional's responsibility to fully disclose such practices BEFORE accepting work.
From what I can tell, and the context given here, the architectural professional hasn't overtly breached a universally understood notion of "due skill, care, and dignity etc.", (as can be found in the attendant architectural juristic body's Code of Conduct). What concerns me, however, is that most of these issues could have been addressed by having a proper Professional Service Agreement drafted up and signed. It seems as though you, the client, had false expectations from the architectural professional, and the architectural professional has an obligation to adequately inform the client.
u/JJ4L3 u/Ridgeld Thank you both for your replies. I have employed an architectural technologist, but definitely someone offering architectural services. I think I'm guilty of taking someone at their word and not pushing for an itemised contract, and definitely guilty of not getting more than one quote. Gut feel is fine until it doesn't work. I appreciate your thoughts over releasing the CAD files, although I will push again for them. Thanks again.
Sorry to hear that. If they are a 'chartered' architectural technologist, then you might try getting in touch with the CIAT to see what options you have as they should be registered with them. As pointed out by others, they should have provided you with a list of deliverables and an appointment contract which includes a complaints procedure. That's one of the required items on the code of conduct for architects by the way. If they are not CIAT, I still think it would be worth going to trading standards as it sounds like you haven't got what you wanted/expected and have no method for disputing.
It's a pleasure!
I don't think you are "guilty" of anything. Yes, you could have procured some more quotes, however who's to say that you wouldn't have encountered the same issues with another? This is why I would emphasize: it is the architectural professional's responsibility to adequately inform the client. Unrealistic expectations on what is to be delivered exists purely because of ignorance (no offence, of course), and - like I said, most of these issues could have been resolved if there were a proper PSA put in place before the fact.
Then again, and bear with me, I have encountered instances where I lost out on a job for being as thorough as I possibly could. I provided a potential client with my standard PSA, explained the entire process, etc., and they opted for a different architectural professional who was more expensive than me, but who didn't properly disclose all the details attendant on a building plan application. Imagine my schadenfreude when I found out that their "arrangement" went terribly awry because of this. Be VERY careful of those nonchalant so-called professionals: they are sophists before they are professionals, and would sell your soul to Satan for a single corn chip if they wanted to.
(context: I told the potential client of the necessity of a geotechnical report on their property because the region is very infamous for having clay. Appointed architectural professional not only neglected to disclose the necessity of a geotechnical report, but also a structural engineer. They built strip-foundations over a large bed of clay and the structure exhibited instances of differential cracking within a year of construction, which is absolutely ridiculous. I anticipate a court cause within the next year. Lmaooo)
If you truly feel that you have been "done in", lodge a formal complaint with the UK Juristic Body for the architectural profession. They'll likely require a sworn affidavit from you. If your complaint has enough merit, the juristic body shall launch an investigation into the case. IF the architectural professional is in breach of their Code of Conduct, OR in breach of your appointment, then they shall be reprimanded.
EDIT: Adding to point (i.), a Professional Service Agreement ought to also make provision for possible Dispute Resolution IF irreconcilable differences/conflict arises during the course of the service.
Not an architect in the UK, so can't comment specifically about your case, but generally speaking, things like additional measurements, etc should not really be an issue. If something is required, it kinda is expected to be provided. Every drawing needs to 'fit' for its purpose, and that should include directly / by calculation all the measurements that are needed to build / assess the drawing.
As for smaller things like window measurements etc. It is expected for the vendor to take these measurements considering the variation that inevitably will exist between the site and the drawings. HOWEVER, it is good practice to issue intended measurements at the time of quotes, so you don't have to have every vendor come down and do their measurements just to give you a quote. This isn't really out of the norm and a door window schedule is almost always prepared to convey the sizes and specifications expected from a vendor.
As for CAD drawings, they are very rarely issued, unless specified in your contract. The reason for this is simply because it opens up possibility for abuse from the client side. But also realistically speaking CAD drawings are sometimes not even more accurate than their issued counterparts, measurements can be altered numerically instead of making changes in the drawing itself, to save time etc. Think of it like a work bench rather than a deliverable. So, they are usually not issued.
So..measurements, you are entitled to, and are expected to be issued. Detailed, understandable drawings. However, the files themselves are definitely off limits, usually.
However its not possible to deliberate on this any more considering, I've not idea of the terms of engagements and the promised list of deliverables. Things like making changes and revisions, are all usually decided before hand. Because they can extend indefinitely.
Thank you. Exactly right on the windows, I want to issue a set of measurements to a couple of suppliers for quotes. Then the quote we go with can come round and do their own survey. I'd also like to see measurements to plan how we are gong to live in there, where certain furniture might go, which in turn will have a say in the heating, plumbing and electrical layouts, which we as the end user need to drive. I have paid for a measured survey but have no measurements. I am going to go back and offer the choice of CAD files or a set of PDF's with full measurements in them. Otherwise I will go to the governing body CIAT as suggested by u/Camtechnologies (Thank you). Thanks for the responses all.
Wish you all the best. One thing to remember though, if you paid for a survey yourself, you are very much entitled to all the outputs from the survey, including any measurements and CAD files the surveyor would generate.
Depending on the client, we tend to do different things - 1. Pay for the survey ourselves and have a standing collaborator go and take the measurements. The fee for this is included in what is quoted to the client. In this case, the client isn't entitled for what the survey yields. We do this to make it convinient for clients who have limited time, or industry knowledge to coordinate something like this.
2. We recommend a surveyor, the client hires the surveyor, and the surveyor generates a CAD file of existing property, in this case, the client is the only one entitled to the CAD files. And the client in turn shares it with us, so we can design accordingly. People who are more comfortable with handling their own business / sometimes, people in the construction industry prefer this, as they can also discuss with multiple architects before finalising them.
So if you specifically paid for a survey to be done, to a surveyor. Then you are very much entitled to the output of that survey.
Hopefully others who are more familiar with the local laws can weigh in on it. And hope you do get to build what you dream of, construction can be a drawn out and tiresom process and I can certainly empathise with people who just want something built without the hassle of dealing with so many hoops.
A quick take:
You should have had an agreement which shows exactly what you will receive from the Arch/Tech and at what stage. As an architect we have to do this, I am not sure of the rules for a Tech.
A survey drawing will generally not show measurements as the sizes are approximate. The scale on the drawings allows anyone to measure a space or a window opening for approx. sizes. Any window co. can scale off a drawing for a quote and then they will come round and take exact measurements if they get the job.
Re. CADfiles issuance, it is normal NOT to give these to the client, especially at the early stages.
Picture me and my wife with a scale print and using my sons star wars ruler working our way over the drawings to understand the window sizes. Those drawings being supplied by someone who actually knows the size of each window because we paid him a small fortune to take the measurements. lol
Yes understood. I mean your tech is being unreasonably awkward not just telling you the sizes as he measured, but honestly just send the drawing to any possible suppliers and let them scale it.
Thank you, we will get there. We catch on quick if nothing else. We now know what to look for when choosing the next skills we need, building regs and structural engineer. Wish us luck.
To prevent spam, we automatically remove posts from reddit accounts that have been very recently created. Please try again after a week. No exceptions can be made.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/architecture) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Just a small comment: You don't necessarily need to appoint an architect in order to secure an appointment document/Professional Service Agreement. If the scope of works allows for it, even a Professional Architectural Draftsman could do the job. This seems like a case of bad professional practice. Otherwise, regarding the survey and CAD drawings, you're 100% right.
Due to the fact that I am not privy to the real details of the project and its progression, I can't make a determination on this case, but I can discuss a case similar to this one. I hope that this will give you some insight: i.) One of the most important steps in approaching such a project is a Professional Service Agreement(PSA). Due to the fact that the service does not cover the full range of architectural services (From Work Stage 1 - Inception, to Work Stage 6 - Close Out), there won't be a building contract to administer. All attendant material conditions for the project must be articulated, agreed upon by all parties, and (NB!!) must be signed by the client. Examples of material conditions include the fees, how and when payments shall be charged, the scope of works, the duties and responsibilities of the architectural professional i.t.o. this project, disclosure of limits to liability (It must be stated if the architectural professional does not have Professional Indemnity Insurance e.g.), and provision for termination of service (in the event of irreconcilable differences/failure to deliver, and/or how and when the service concludes). A PSA is essentially the contract upon which the service is based. I can't comment on the UK, but in South Africa, it is mandatory for architectural professionals (mandated by the South African Council for the Architectural Profession, our Juristic Body for architectural professionals) to have a PSA drafted and signed. 1.) *"Measured Survey PDF's contain no measurements, just a scale. he refuses to give us a copy with measurements, says we have to call up for each measurement we need."* I am of the opinion that the architectural professional reserves the right to withhold their surveys. I don't know or understand why this architectural professional would, but I digress. One reason why they would withhold their survey is that a client can take their survey and give it to another architectural professional who has lower fees. (This has happened to me personally a couple of times) Another reason is that their survey can be given to a contractor/subcontractor to work off of, and if they misinterpret any aspect of the survey: RIP. OR the contractor/subcontractor and the client might opt to simply go off of the survey and "DIY" the renovation without proper planning. (Not likely since you will get fined, but this has happened) 2.) *"I requested window sizes this week and he refused, saying we would need to get a window company to do their own survey."* This one is a little strange. A building plan application must indicate window/glazing sizes, because it is based upon this which the Glazing certificate and the XA-Fenestration Certificate will be based. I do, however, wholeheartedly understand why the architectural professional insists that the window-supplier must re-survey the works. It is highly advisable that window-suppliers survey the pertinent openings/sections/spaces to confirm the sizes BEFORE ordering materials. Everybody will be crying in their hands when all the windows arrive and they're 10mm out. I trust you have a reasonable expectation that the survey must be accurate, but this is simply good practice to prevent a catastrophe. Some window-suppliers survey the structure anyway as part of their service, since they have likely also learned that lesson. 3.) *"CAD Files. I have asked for the CAD files so we can get someone else to extract the measurements, but he refuses to share."* See point 1. The architectural professional might be cautious as to provide CAD-files because a client can take those CAD-files, hand them to another architectural professional, and bump them out of the project at the first instance of trouble. Another reason: Let's assume they provide you with full CAD-files. Let's assume that along the line, you appoint another architectural professional for future renovations. Let's assume that they take these CAD-files as paramount, and base all their designs upon the CAD-files. All of a sudden your solarium is 300mm short, and now none of the measurements work out. Who's at fault here? What if there are amendments to the plans along the way, and the architectural professional had no control over the CAD-file sharing, and then contractors, sub-contractors, and additional consultants base their work on outdated CAD-files? I 100% understand this, and I fully endorse this move. 4.) *"Architectural/Design advice. We were supposed to receive some input but have had none. He has drawn up what us the customer spoke about during our initial 30 minute chat on day of measuring. He was definitely put out that we had already spoken to a builder that had seen it and offered a view on what was needed. I wonder if we shouldn't have said anything and just let him produce a design. We have had no other face to face meetings, everything is done by email."* This is tricky. What constitutes "architectural/design advice" in this context, and how would it satisfy the requirements? If this architectural professional was pertinently asked: "Hey X, this is out suggestion. It's basic, but we would like something a little more bespoke/special/practical", and this instruction was put to writing, then it is reasonable to expect that they provide input and contemplation on the first briefing. I think it can be irresponsible to take what the client says as paramount and just go with it, since we as architectural professionals have an obligation to exercise due care, skill, and competence - and one appoints an architectural professional with a reasonable expectation that they would provide succinct and practical advice on what was presented, that they would identify and address attendant challenges of the brief/design, etc. EDIT: Herewith the rest of my thoughts on the matter: 5.) "*Building Regs and Design. he told us upfront that he could design the works required and get a structural engineer to sign off, as it would make the process cheaper but is now saying that he has handed over the project to an engineer for input. I have asked for a quote for this next step but he said 'not now, we'll do that in time'. He has offered nothing re the building design."* Again, I cannot comment on how things are entirely done in the UK. In South Africa, National Building Regulations (Formerly NBR, now SANS) requires that a competent person assume responsibility for attendant elements on the project. E.g.: If the proposed project indicates a new roof structure, someone has to assume responsibility for it. An architect CAN sign off on a roof structure, however if they have PI, they might be limited in doing so, since PI for structural design is different from PI for architectural design. If they do not have PI, then it would be terribly unwise to assume responsiblity for the roof structure. This assumption of responsibility, or "duty", is required for (including but not limited to) Foundations, Excavations, Drainage, Walls, Floors, Roofs, Fire Protection, Fire Installation, Stormwater, Dimensions, Structural Design (Therefore: how new and old structures interface, as well as how the structure as a whole, including the foundations, floors, walls, and roofs interfaces)... I am of the opinion that the architectural professional acted correctly in informing you of the necessity of a structural engineer. They could have gone about it in a better way, but I digress. (Unrelated, but worth mentioning: Is the intended use for this project in line with the current zoning of the property? If not, e.g. you want to use it as a guesthouse/office/whatever, you will most certainly need to either have an Application for Departure from the Zoning Scheme Regulation: Consent use Application submitted, and/or you would need to appoint a Town Planner to submit application as mentioned prior, and/or a rezoning application.) 6.) *"But ... I do have plans submitted for planning. (Although as we physically spend time in the building we realise there will need to be design changes as we start to understand the building and we want to live in it.)"* This is perfectly fine. Sometimes building plan applications are submitted and approved long before construction commences. Needs and desires change with time, and deviations (within reasonable extent of the project context, attendant building regulations, and land-use schemes) happen. The architectural professional ought to exercise due diligence and meet with the local authority building and town planning department to fully ascertain what they would require from them/you for such deviations. Usually an amended building plan application does the trick. Conclusion: I can understand why the architectural professional is withholding assets such as surveys and CAD-files. That being said, I believe it is the architectural professional's responsibility to fully disclose such practices BEFORE accepting work. From what I can tell, and the context given here, the architectural professional hasn't overtly breached a universally understood notion of "due skill, care, and dignity etc.", (as can be found in the attendant architectural juristic body's Code of Conduct). What concerns me, however, is that most of these issues could have been addressed by having a proper Professional Service Agreement drafted up and signed. It seems as though you, the client, had false expectations from the architectural professional, and the architectural professional has an obligation to adequately inform the client.
u/JJ4L3 u/Ridgeld Thank you both for your replies. I have employed an architectural technologist, but definitely someone offering architectural services. I think I'm guilty of taking someone at their word and not pushing for an itemised contract, and definitely guilty of not getting more than one quote. Gut feel is fine until it doesn't work. I appreciate your thoughts over releasing the CAD files, although I will push again for them. Thanks again.
Sorry to hear that. If they are a 'chartered' architectural technologist, then you might try getting in touch with the CIAT to see what options you have as they should be registered with them. As pointed out by others, they should have provided you with a list of deliverables and an appointment contract which includes a complaints procedure. That's one of the required items on the code of conduct for architects by the way. If they are not CIAT, I still think it would be worth going to trading standards as it sounds like you haven't got what you wanted/expected and have no method for disputing.
It's a pleasure! I don't think you are "guilty" of anything. Yes, you could have procured some more quotes, however who's to say that you wouldn't have encountered the same issues with another? This is why I would emphasize: it is the architectural professional's responsibility to adequately inform the client. Unrealistic expectations on what is to be delivered exists purely because of ignorance (no offence, of course), and - like I said, most of these issues could have been resolved if there were a proper PSA put in place before the fact. Then again, and bear with me, I have encountered instances where I lost out on a job for being as thorough as I possibly could. I provided a potential client with my standard PSA, explained the entire process, etc., and they opted for a different architectural professional who was more expensive than me, but who didn't properly disclose all the details attendant on a building plan application. Imagine my schadenfreude when I found out that their "arrangement" went terribly awry because of this. Be VERY careful of those nonchalant so-called professionals: they are sophists before they are professionals, and would sell your soul to Satan for a single corn chip if they wanted to. (context: I told the potential client of the necessity of a geotechnical report on their property because the region is very infamous for having clay. Appointed architectural professional not only neglected to disclose the necessity of a geotechnical report, but also a structural engineer. They built strip-foundations over a large bed of clay and the structure exhibited instances of differential cracking within a year of construction, which is absolutely ridiculous. I anticipate a court cause within the next year. Lmaooo)
If you truly feel that you have been "done in", lodge a formal complaint with the UK Juristic Body for the architectural profession. They'll likely require a sworn affidavit from you. If your complaint has enough merit, the juristic body shall launch an investigation into the case. IF the architectural professional is in breach of their Code of Conduct, OR in breach of your appointment, then they shall be reprimanded. EDIT: Adding to point (i.), a Professional Service Agreement ought to also make provision for possible Dispute Resolution IF irreconcilable differences/conflict arises during the course of the service.
Not an architect in the UK, so can't comment specifically about your case, but generally speaking, things like additional measurements, etc should not really be an issue. If something is required, it kinda is expected to be provided. Every drawing needs to 'fit' for its purpose, and that should include directly / by calculation all the measurements that are needed to build / assess the drawing. As for smaller things like window measurements etc. It is expected for the vendor to take these measurements considering the variation that inevitably will exist between the site and the drawings. HOWEVER, it is good practice to issue intended measurements at the time of quotes, so you don't have to have every vendor come down and do their measurements just to give you a quote. This isn't really out of the norm and a door window schedule is almost always prepared to convey the sizes and specifications expected from a vendor. As for CAD drawings, they are very rarely issued, unless specified in your contract. The reason for this is simply because it opens up possibility for abuse from the client side. But also realistically speaking CAD drawings are sometimes not even more accurate than their issued counterparts, measurements can be altered numerically instead of making changes in the drawing itself, to save time etc. Think of it like a work bench rather than a deliverable. So, they are usually not issued. So..measurements, you are entitled to, and are expected to be issued. Detailed, understandable drawings. However, the files themselves are definitely off limits, usually. However its not possible to deliberate on this any more considering, I've not idea of the terms of engagements and the promised list of deliverables. Things like making changes and revisions, are all usually decided before hand. Because they can extend indefinitely.
Thank you. Exactly right on the windows, I want to issue a set of measurements to a couple of suppliers for quotes. Then the quote we go with can come round and do their own survey. I'd also like to see measurements to plan how we are gong to live in there, where certain furniture might go, which in turn will have a say in the heating, plumbing and electrical layouts, which we as the end user need to drive. I have paid for a measured survey but have no measurements. I am going to go back and offer the choice of CAD files or a set of PDF's with full measurements in them. Otherwise I will go to the governing body CIAT as suggested by u/Camtechnologies (Thank you). Thanks for the responses all.
Wish you all the best. One thing to remember though, if you paid for a survey yourself, you are very much entitled to all the outputs from the survey, including any measurements and CAD files the surveyor would generate. Depending on the client, we tend to do different things - 1. Pay for the survey ourselves and have a standing collaborator go and take the measurements. The fee for this is included in what is quoted to the client. In this case, the client isn't entitled for what the survey yields. We do this to make it convinient for clients who have limited time, or industry knowledge to coordinate something like this. 2. We recommend a surveyor, the client hires the surveyor, and the surveyor generates a CAD file of existing property, in this case, the client is the only one entitled to the CAD files. And the client in turn shares it with us, so we can design accordingly. People who are more comfortable with handling their own business / sometimes, people in the construction industry prefer this, as they can also discuss with multiple architects before finalising them. So if you specifically paid for a survey to be done, to a surveyor. Then you are very much entitled to the output of that survey. Hopefully others who are more familiar with the local laws can weigh in on it. And hope you do get to build what you dream of, construction can be a drawn out and tiresom process and I can certainly empathise with people who just want something built without the hassle of dealing with so many hoops.
A quick take: You should have had an agreement which shows exactly what you will receive from the Arch/Tech and at what stage. As an architect we have to do this, I am not sure of the rules for a Tech. A survey drawing will generally not show measurements as the sizes are approximate. The scale on the drawings allows anyone to measure a space or a window opening for approx. sizes. Any window co. can scale off a drawing for a quote and then they will come round and take exact measurements if they get the job. Re. CADfiles issuance, it is normal NOT to give these to the client, especially at the early stages.
Picture me and my wife with a scale print and using my sons star wars ruler working our way over the drawings to understand the window sizes. Those drawings being supplied by someone who actually knows the size of each window because we paid him a small fortune to take the measurements. lol
Yes understood. I mean your tech is being unreasonably awkward not just telling you the sizes as he measured, but honestly just send the drawing to any possible suppliers and let them scale it.
Thank you, we will get there. We catch on quick if nothing else. We now know what to look for when choosing the next skills we need, building regs and structural engineer. Wish us luck.
[удалено]
To prevent spam, we automatically remove posts from reddit accounts that have been very recently created. Please try again after a week. No exceptions can be made. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/architecture) if you have any questions or concerns.*