# Architect fees for extension



## phester (29 Sep 2010)

Hi All, We are just starting the procedure of finding an architect for an extension. 

Total are is 55sq meters 2 story. An early estimate of the cost of build is 50-60k for building works ex vat.

The architect fees are 9.9% ex vat of the building costs. However it seems that this excludes the application fees, news paper fees, OS maps planning app fee.

Also this excludes 
his mileage =0.65per mile
all other consultants fees
prints A4=0.45 per page
A0 = 5.6 per page
planning appeals
any additional information requested by the planning board.

I mentioned that my turnkey figure was 60k but this already looks like 75 + extras + over runs

Does this seem right for an architect to part manage the tendering stage and sign off on the build? or are these figures pie in the sky


----------



## Staples (29 Sep 2010)

The insistence, among architects, to be paid on the basis of a percentage of the value of the build is not as strong as it was in recent years.

It should be easier, these days, to engage an architect who's willing to operate on the basis of a flat fee for each element of the build.  Even during the boom, there were architects willing to work on this basis.  There should be even more of them now.

The inclusion of a mileage allowance to visit the premises is also a little rich, IMHO. Charging 45 cents for a sheet of A4 paper also smacks a little of greed.

It sounds to me like this guy either hasn't heard of or heassn't been affected by the recession.  He must be good.


----------



## onq (29 Sep 2010)

It used to be 11% for extensions depending on the complexity and quality of the design, assuming the cost was under iIRC €150,000. Its a sliding scale.

Professionals expect to earn their living doing their work - its not subsisdised by selling software or engaging in small building projects for the builder's 15% profit.

Your turnkey figure was okay for the cost of building proper, but it looks like you forgot to add in professional fees and demolitions.

€100 a square foot is a reasonable cost for medium quality work and that suggests €55-60,000 excluding siteworks, external works, works to the existing house, etc.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the        matters    at      hand.


----------



## OneAndOnly (29 Sep 2010)

I'm getting 75m2 extension(s).  Building tenders starting to come in now!!  Its been a long process.  I tried TenderMe for an architect.  For planning only service I got 16 quotes (in less than 2 hours!), they ranged from €500-1200.  This was 2-3 months ago.  Ended up going with a recommendation at the higher end.  

My budget is my business and mine only - the % thing really f*ks me off (I had to swear).  If I get a 2k or 20k kitchen I can't see how architect or builder for that matter should get a cut.  Likewise for tiles, bathroom fittings etc...  Edit - rant added!


----------



## Complainer (29 Sep 2010)

Staples said:


> The insistence, among architects, to be paid on the basis of a percentage of the value of the build is not as strong as it was in recent years.
> 
> It should be easier, these days, to engage an architect who's willing to operate on the basis of a flat fee for each element of the build.  Even during the boom, there were architects willing to work on this basis.  There should be even more of them now.


Hear, hear. A percentage fee is incentivising him to increase the overall project costs. Run quickly.


----------



## RKQ (30 Sep 2010)

RIAI likes to advertise its ability to protect the consumer. Their radio advert were removed after complaints last year. Yet a number of consumers here seem to feel agrieved at paying a percentage fee. I can understand your feelings and I prefer to give a set fee per stage.

I feel this is a very important point on consumer protection and would ask Complainer, Staples and OneAndOnly to complain to RIAI and more importantly there local TD. Many TD's will be interested to hear first hand accounts of RIAI Comsumer protection. There is an ongoing debate in the profession at the moment.


----------



## Shawady (30 Sep 2010)

phester said:


> Hi All, We are just starting the procedure of finding an architect for an extension.
> 
> Total are is 55sq meters 2 story. An early estimate of the cost of build is 50-60k for building works ex vat.
> 
> ...


 
I got a 2 storey extension done this year with a similar budget to you. My architect gave me a set fee for everything and broke it down if I just wanted to use him to planning stage.
He charged 4.2K in total and if you want his details I can send them to you.


----------



## rosemartin (30 Sep 2010)

i have just completed 40sq m two story extension and major internal revoations for a building cost of €43,000,  the kit out cost me €18,000, new kitchen,bathroom, tiles, flooring,etc..etc.  my archetict charged me a flat rate for  drawing up plans and dealing with planning.got my planning within two months.   it was eight months later when got finances toghter for building work. he then charged me 187plus vat for site visits which there were three to certify works for staged payments.

no question of mileage he had to travel 25miles, overall cost just short of 2700


----------



## onq (30 Sep 2010)

OneAndOnly said:


> I'm getting 75m2 extension(s).  Building tenders starting to come in now!!  Its been a long process.  I tried TenderMe for an architect.  For planning only service I got 16 quotes (in less than 2 hours!), they ranged from €500-1200.  This was 2-3 months ago.  Ended up going with a recommendation at the higher end.





Fees are charged on a percentage basis of the nett building costs.
This tends to reflect fairly the overall cost of the build and does not include the fit out works.



> My budget is my business and mine only - the % thing really f*ks me off (I had to swear).


How else do you arrive at a reasonable estimate of costs for the work to be done?
UNless there is some reasonable estimate of costs the archtiect will work for below cost and swiftly go bankrupt.



> If I get a 2k or 20k kitchen I can't see how architect or builder for that matter should get a cut.  Likewise for tiles, bathroom fittings etc...  Edit - rant added!



Once again, Architects don't charge their fees based  on fit out costs unless they   are specifically engaged to do the fit out works - highly unlikely in a   private dwelling.

You don't seem to understand the reason for the percentage OneAndOnly - its to give a reasonable estimate of fees on which the Archtiect can profitably carry out his work.
He doesn't get a "cut", he gets paid his fees, but there is some logic to agreeing a fixed fee for the work prior to tenders coming in.

A guy who screws his architect on fees to save a couple of hundred isn't giving him any incentive to work through a set of drawings to improve buildability to save him thousands.

He'll get the bare set of details and three, maybe for site visits and  heaven help the builder if he makes a mistake .
He'll just be told "do it again according to the drawings or I won't sign off on the work".

Not the way I like to work I have to say and thankfully so far all my clients have seen the light and reaped the rewards of both getting competent work done and value for money.

If I can offer one piece of advice, go for value, not cost, and make sure you get a cost estimate for the work before you go out to tender.
That way you'll see the ones who are coming back with unrealistically low tenders.
These will ruin a subbie or go bust or do poor quality work.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                 as a defence or support - in and of itself - should  legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                 Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## onq (30 Sep 2010)

Complainer said:


> Hear, hear. A percentage fee is incentivising him to increase the overall project costs. Run quickly.



That's nonsense Complainer.

Percentage fees arose because in general terms the more costly the building, the greater the amount of work to be done designing it and brining it to site.

Percentage fees are usually calculated on a sliding scale, with the more costly buildings getting done for less, percentage-wise.

Once the percentage fee is agreed, substitutions of materials and buildability can be brought into the equation.

If the architect gets his 10 per cent of the nett cost estimate and he works with the builder to improve ecominies os scale by 10 per cent, he saves the cost of his fees.

Presenting it  as some sort of rip-off as others have done here is incorrect.

Use it as a tool to estimate fees and do a deal for an agreed amount is using it correctly and can yield profitable work for all concerned and an excellent service.


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                  as a defence or support - in and of itself - should   legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                  Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on  the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## Complainer (30 Sep 2010)

onq said:


> If the architect gets his 10 per cent of the nett cost estimate and he works with the builder to improve ecominies os scale by 10 per cent, he saves the cost of his fees.


And if he doesn't get economies of scale, and if in fact the build costs go up by 10% because the architect missed something, what happens then?



onq said:


> Use it as a tool to estimate fees and do a deal for an agreed amount is using it correctly


I'd have no objection to this, but I've no idea why the architect would choose to communicate the fee to the customer on a % basis. The customer doesn't really care how the fee was calculated.


----------



## onq (30 Sep 2010)

Complainer said:


> And if he doesn't get economies of scale, and if in fact the build costs go up by 10% because the architect missed something, what happens then?


Architects aren't quantity surveyors.
Q.S.'s price starting from standard specs, but with the derogations noted on drawings and specialist items.
Its unlikely that a Q.S. will miss anything significant in a Bill and there are factors built in to even a per-square-foot figure that tend towards over-estimation for the budget cost estimate stage.
It is far more likely that Prime Cost or Provisional Sums estimates will run over and there is only so much one can do to eliminate these in the absence of accurate information or pricing/availability of alternatives.
Unknowns in an existing building or bad ground are the two big unknowns in most projects.
Apart from clients who keep changing their mind, after they have signed off on drawings.


> I'd have no objection to this, but I've no idea why the architect would choose to communicate the fee to the customer on a % basis. The customer doesn't really care how the fee was calculated.


On the contrary, I think most architects who quote percentages are trying to be fair to their clients by showing them the calculation of the fees.
Certain things are not taken into account, typically things that the archtiect did not advise on, such as for example


the site acquisition
civil works
drainage works
landscaping works
 It would be different if for example the architect did a lot of work selecting a site or evaluating several sites for the project. This might be "rolled into" a reasonable percentage based on the build only, or it might be charged separately and a tighter percentage quoted for the build.

Its all swings and roundabouts Complainer and I am reading and listening to what everybody says, but a building is not like any other commodity you can buy. Unlike a mass produced vehicle, every building - merely in terms of site alone - is different.

Where multiple units of the same building types are agreed, for example in terms of housing developments, the per unit cost plummets, and the real work is often contained in achieving the urban form of the development, fo rexample the Johnstown scheme near Navan.

On very large projects a separate urban planning consultant may be brought in, which is an additional cost to the architect's fees and will largely be concerned with designing a high quality integrated urban environment - for example the guideline work that was done for the Adamstown SDZ.

Very often the only fair way to cost these schemes is percentage wise, but people who do relatively small one off houses appear to have gotten the wrong and of the stick.

Do they begrudge estate agents their 1.5% in the same way? I doubt it, even though the estate agents work may consist of a 100 glossy brochures, space in their shop window and twenty showings and cannot in any way be linked back to the price of the house.

Its accepted that if the estate agent can charge at a certain level he can stay in business and their service is perceived to be of benefit to the vendor and the purchaser.
You can advertise in the Buy-and-Sell, but most people use Estate Agents and their 1.5% because they see some value in it.

It leads me to infer that people begrudge architects their percentage because they fail to appreciate what they are getting.
I intend to change all that, and if I find any (other) architects out there not doing right by their clients I will personally make it my business to nail them because its dragging down the rest of us.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                   as a defence or support - in and of itself - should    legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                   Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on   the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## OneAndOnly (30 Sep 2010)

onq said:


> Fees are charged on a percentage basis of the nett building costs.
> 
> 
> You don't seem to understand the reason for the percentage OneAndOnly - its to give a reasonable estimate of fees on which the Archtiect can profitably carry out his work.
> ...



I fully understand the percentage, I just can't fathom why you would want your fee to be linked your clients material choices.  So my kitchen example wasn't great, how about  Tegral tiles v the finest hand cut slate, make any difference to you as an architect, don't think so.  Why should the client pay  you more if they choose slate?.  
The same goes for wall construction, foundations, external finishes etc. When its explicity linked to the cost of the materials and labour in the build, in my mind its a cut.  

No one here but you mentioned rip off or anything like that.  If an architect can get 30% then fair play to them - thankfully the market is preveiling.  You'll get what the market dictates and so it should be.  

I work as a systems architect and was self employed from 1996 to 2006, during that time my highest fee was £155 stg an hour the worst was €23 an hour.  I was doing pretty much the same work, my fee was mostly dictated by the amount of work available available for someone with my skills at a particular time. 

I've the same issue with solictors charging a percentage for house selling/buying, thankfully it seems to be gone aswell...as for EAs' lets not go there...


----------



## onq (30 Sep 2010)

Don't ask and answer the question OneAndOnly.
Yes the choice of hand cut slate makes a difference.

Unless you want to make your building look like its trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, you need to decide on the level of detail to match this choice of material.
You don't go for hand cut slate and then to modernist velux rooflight solutions, you form dormers and use proper ridge and hips tiles with specialist SS straps to fix them.
Far too many people choose levels of materials and then they utterly fail to follow through on the detailing.

You understanding is flawed - its is not explicitly linked - it is linked by percentage only and over decades it has been found to be a levelling drift giving reasonable fees and reasonable work.
I don't buy your "nobody mentioned rip-off" denial taken against "thankfully the market is prevailing" comment.
The market is not "prevailing" - architects are being screwed royally on fees.

Your final nail in your argument is the "You'll get what the market dictates and so it should be" - I don't think so.
The current below cost fee structure will not last IMO.
This isn't the price of sweets we're talking about here.

Architects in general study for five years full time in a third level course and then a minimum of two years post graduate work with a senior architect and sometimes far longer.
They don't do this to be beaten on fees by some unqualified and untalented person who offers ridiculously low fees and bland assurances of impending success.
We've had the David Grants thank you but it looks like some people haven't learnt and perhaps that time is coming around again.

There will be restrictions on the architects who were lookingt for 20-30% and that's fair enough - that's not a sustainable level of fees.
8-11% is the range for most domestic work - its good a starting point for  fee negotiations depending on complexity, perhaps dropping one or two points when resolved.

You'll only get technicians and draughtsmen working for much below this - and you'll get what you pay for in terms of the finished design.
My highest fees is €600 per day for court work, but that's usually based on full days in Court - which is a restrictive environment where you cannot do other work while you're waiting to go on and give evidence.

You have a problem with a percentage calculation but see no issue with rates that vary wildly from €23 an hour [x 37 x 4 = €3,400 a month] to €155 an hour [x 37 x 4 = €22,940 a month!]

For 2007 I averaged €7,000 a month, less than a third your highest, and it never ran much over that, all on percentage fees basis.

I don't think your argument really stands up.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                    as a defence or support - in and of itself - should     legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                    Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on    the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## abc1234 (1 Oct 2010)

Just to add my tuppence-worth as someone who is shopping around for an architect for a renovation & extension project.

We too were troubled by the % fee thing - a friend who recently did a similar project definitely thought that it incentivised his architect to up the spec of everything (they ended up having several all-out rows about it - not where you want to be).

However that was in the boom-times, so now I think architects are getting a bit more realistic.  They are still aiming to get about 10% of your budget, but will negotiate down from that point.

So far we have had several offers of fixed price deals to get us to planning permission - range of about €2K to €4K (Dublin area).  This does appear to work out better than the % fee, so we are likely to run with a fixed price for this stage of the project.

I have no doubt ONQ, that to some extent you get what you pay for... but in many lines of work (mine included), during the recessionary times you have to work twice as hard for half the fees.  Just the way it is in a buyer's market.

I have to say, one thing I find hard to gauge is how to evaluate these guys.  All seem to offer a very brief chat/meeting free of charge, and on that basis you are supposed to decide.  It is very difficult.  I know in these tough times they cannot give away advice for free, but we seem to be mainly deciding on "chemistry" and "gut feel".  I've had more information available making much smaller financial decisions!!


----------



## RKQ (1 Oct 2010)

abc1234 said:


> I have to say, one thing I find hard to gauge is how to evaluate these guys. All seem to offer a very brief chat/meeting free of charge, and on that basis you are supposed to decide. It is very difficult.


 Photo's, presentation sketches and references might help. Any experienced designed or Architect will be happy to show you there previous work.

Ask lots of questions on your planned development - materials, insulation types, passive details, eco technology etc - check their knowledge.

Gut feeling is important as you'll need to develop a good working relationship.

A percentage fee can work if its agreed from the start and the Client realises whats covered and whats an extra. Charging per A4 sheet of paper or milage on top of say 10% is very petty, unfair, greedy and unprofessional IMO.


----------



## Complainer (1 Oct 2010)

onq said:


> etailing.
> 
> You understanding is flawed - its is not explicitly linked - it is linked by percentage only and over decades it has been found to be a levelling drift giving reasonable fees and reasonable work.


Is this finding of 'reasonable fees and reasonable work' your own professional view, or your clients' view, or is there any decent research on this?



OneAndOnly said:


> I've the same issue with solictors charging a percentage for house selling/buying, thankfully it seems to be gone aswell...as for EAs' lets not go there...


I agree with you about the solicitors conveyancing, but actually for the EA, it makes perfect sense for it to be % based, as it is in the client's interest to get the maximum price. In fact, instead of a flat 1%, you could really incentivise your EA by offering say 5% of everything over a target price. This assumes that your EA is professional enough to know when to stop pushing for more, and take what is on the table.



onq said:


> Architects aren't quantity surveyors.
> Q.S.'s price starting from standard specs, but with the derogations noted on drawings and specialist items.
> Its unlikely that a Q.S. will miss anything significant in a Bill and there are factors built in to even a per-square-foot figure that tend towards over-estimation for the budget cost estimate stage.
> It is far more likely that Prime Cost or Provisional Sums estimates will run over and there is only so much one can do to eliminate these in the absence of accurate information or pricing/availability of alternatives.
> ...


In fairness, you seem to be evading the question, and implying that no architect is ever at fault. I don't know anyone who has been through a house extension project that came in under budget. It always runs over budget. So there is definitely a problem with budgeting.

It just seems fundamentally wrong to be basing the fee on a % instead of  on the work involved. If my print designer wanted to charge me on a % of the number of leaflets printed, I'd tell him where to go. If my web designer wanted to charge me on the basis of transactions processed, I'd tell him where to go. If my photographer tried to charge me based on the number of times I print the photo, I tell him where to go (this one has actually happened).

So why don't architects simply charge based on the time that's going to be required to complete the job? 

And what happens in a % fee agreement when the overall price of the job increases?


----------



## Firefly (1 Oct 2010)

Complainer said:


> It just seems fundamentally wrong to be basing the fee on a % instead of on the work involved. If my print designer wanted to charge me on a % of the number of leaflets printed, I'd tell him where to go. If my web designer wanted to charge me on the basis of transactions processed, I'd tell him where to go. If my photographer tried to charge me based on the number of times I print the photo, I tell him where to go (this one has actually happened).
> 
> So why don't architects simply charge based on the time that's going to be required to complete the job?
> 
> And what happens in a % fee agreement when the overall price of the job increases?


 
I find the % thing off-putting because it's an un-known. But I see the logic from an architect's perspective...usually extensions are more expensive because they are more complex, requiring more work for the architect. A client constantly changing their mind impacts the architect in a fixed price agreement . What I'd like is to agree a fixed price based on the agreed plans. The architect should provide an estimated cost to any changes after that - then the client can decide if they really want that change.


----------



## Complainer (1 Oct 2010)

Firefly said:


> A client constantly changing their mind impacts the architect in a fixed price agreement . What I'd like is to agree a fixed price based on the agreed plans. The architect should provide an estimated cost to any changes after that - then the client can decide if they really want that change.



True, but the same applies to any services. It comes down to change management. Builders tend to be pretty good at charging for changes of mind.


----------



## onq (2 Oct 2010)

Complainer said:


> Is this finding of 'reasonable fees and  reasonable work' your own professional view, or your clients' view, or  is there any decent research on this?



I originally said "over decades it has been found to be a  levelling drift giving reasonable fees and reasonable work" and by that  I meant that my experience of it was that it was developed by the RIAI  at the scale of fees with specified services under the various  schedules.

I have used this to define what i term "starter"  figures for profitable work, and then I offer discounts to clients based  on reduced overheads for a sole tradership - but i make sure they  understand the basis for the starting figure based on the percentage  rate, so they know what level of discount they are getting.

Most clients I have found appreciate this, some prefer a fixed fee which I am also happy to quote.



> I agree with you about the solicitors conveyancing, but actually for the  EA, it makes perfect sense for it to be % based, as it is in the  client's interest to get the maximum price. In fact, instead of a flat  1%, you could really incentivise your EA by offering say 5% of  everything over a target price. This assumes that your EA is  professional enough to know when to stop pushing for more, and take what  is on the table.


Well, in fact there is no pro-rata increase in workload for  conveyancing - as opposed to designing - in terms of the primary  conveyance if its a straight lease.
Where the solicitor earns their  fees is where the site is composed of a  patchwork of titles riddled  with easements and finding out and resolving all these things both on  paper and on the ground.
Sometimes there is an overlap and a piece of  unresolved ground gets designed around by the architect, often by  making it a part of a circulation route.


> In fairness, you seem to be evading the question, and implying that no  architect is ever at fault. I don't know anyone who has been through a  house extension project that came in under budget. It always runs over  budget. So there is definitely a problem with budgeting.


What question?
I  explained the derivation and use of a percentage basis for calculating  fees, on a sliding scale, decreasing with cost and increasing with  complexity.
That's explaining, not dodging- its up to you to review  the explanation and point out a flaw in my logic or the quoted facts,  but don't accuse me of dodging when I met it head on and responded  directly and on topic. 

As for the other matter, who says the architect is running the budget?
ON  a larger scheme the client should appoint a quantity surveyor - on a  smaller scheme the architect can advise on costings but it'll still be  down to the tender price that has been accepted.

Depending on  whether there is a Bill of Quantities or not and whether it is deemed to  be part of the contract documents ore not, the architects drawings and  specifications are what the job is priced on.

If the client has paid for a good set of tender and working drawings then the building should come in + or - 5-10%.

Any  amount of unforeseen things can increase costs when you get to site,  and while prime cost and provisional sums can be sued to estimate the  total cost of the work, that#s all they are - aids to making an  estimate.


> It just seems fundamentally wrong to be basing the fee on a % instead of   on the work involved. If my print designer wanted to charge me on a %  of the number of leaflets printed, I'd tell him where to go. If my web  designer wanted to charge me on the basis of transactions processed, I'd  tell him where to go. If my photographer tried to charge me based on  the number of times I print the photo, I tell him where to go (this one  has actually happened).
> 
> So why don't architects simply charge based on the time that's going to be required to complete the job?
> 
> And what happens in a % fee agreement when the overall price of the job increases?



You asked two questions, so I'll answer sequentially as asked.

A) 
Piecework can gets charge on a piecework rate, no problem.

You  cannot equate professional services encompassing months or years  dealing with many unknowns and a brief that isn't defined with a small  job, the design content of which can be quantified in hours or days, and  where the brief is understood by both parties and fully defined.

That's apples and oranges.

In  relation to your photographer, he is entitled to copyright his work, as  I am my drawings. If you're using his work for personal enjoyment and  not commercial gain, I see no reason why he would charge you for each  use. If OTOH you are using the work repeatedly for commercial gain, he  is entitled to charge for its use according to my understanding of how  that profession works.

My clients pay me to design buildings and when I am paid they have use of my work for the purpose of that development only.
If  the site is sold on I hand over my drawings to follow-on architects  with a license to use them for that development only, requesting an  undertaking that they will not use them for any other work without my  permission.
Using my designs elsewhere without my express permission would constitute a breach of copyright.

B)

The  issue isn't cost per se, but rather why it occurred and whether the  increase incurred extra complexity in the design of the built work  leading to extra design work, as well as when the extra work was  incurred.

Simply put, a change from lead to zinc roof at initial  briefing stages costs the client nothing - such variations are allowed  for at this stage.

If this occurred at statutory approval stage  on a mid range project the notation on up to a dozen drawings would need  to be revised - a relatively minor cost that most archtiects would  absorb.

But let's say this change occurred after tenders had been  accepted, contractors and subcontractors appointed, contracts for  supply of materials issued, specifications and BoQ agreed in writing,  and perhaps someone appointed under the artisans and tradesman's clause  to carry out the roofing work.

This requires changes to finished drawings, agreed specifations and issued contract documents.

There  is a revised specification, and on a large job there are possibly  hundreds of finished drawings requiring to be annotated, including A4  booklets of details requiring revision and co-ordination between the  documents, variations to the B of Q, an amended health and safety file,  the determination of a craftsman's contract with possible legal  implications and the appointment of another craftsman.

This is no  longer loose change Complainer, and this revision is a relatively  simple one of substituting one sheet roofing material for another.

The  cost of making these changes need proper accounting procedures to be  put in place in the archtiects office, they can be quantified and the  addition fees charged to the client on a charge out rate reflecting the  cost of work done- but these costs are not straighforward.

If the  practice is a busy practice [oh, wishful thinking!] performing such  changes may adversely affect the profitability of the office


if the work needs to be done to a deadline out of hours for example
where it it so extensive this cannot occur, during business hours in time previously allocated to complete other profitable work
in all cases there are additional overheads to pay.
These  are not "tricks" to get money out of people, they are the costs of  doing business and I have yet to be involved in a job where changes did  not occur at every stage in the development.
On an extension I did recently the roof changed from pitched to flat after the contractor was appointed.

Percentage fees accounts for some of the changes - at the early stages, but not all of them.

So  the issue is changes and their timing, as much as the percentage fee  basis, when it comes to a job starting out and remaining profitable.

There  is no "dodging" here Complainer - I hope after reading this you will  agree that designing buildings is different to most other design  disciplines in terms of scale, complexity and how costs are arrived at  and variations dealt with and some of the reasons are given above.

Put  it like this - it costs circa 5-7 years and around €5 Billion in terms  of design, testing, prototypes and type approval to bring one new model  of car into being.

Car models are produce in the hundreds of  thousands to millions range of numbers, change every 5-6 years and most  are obsolete in 20-30 years maximum. The designers liability is covered  by the limited company.

Most buildings are one-off designs   designed in a fraction of the time, and for fees that are usually in the  range of one-thousandth of the cost and the last for 60 to several  thousand years. The archtiects liability in tort and negligence extends  after death to his estate.

Apples and oranges, Complainer, and yes, this is only scratching the surface of this debate.

Just to finish off with my command of detail, you commented on whether architects are always right.

Not  only are they sometimes wrong, but I am one of the few who will go to  court against anther architect or building professional, so I see it  from both sides, but percentage fees doesn't ensure competence, it just a  means to ensure that the bank pays the salaries.

Competence is  required at all levels - top-down and bottom-up - in a design firm, and  you owe it to your client to be competence whatever the final fee.


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                     as a defence or support - in and of itself - should      legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                     Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on     the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## onq (2 Oct 2010)

Firefly said:


> I find the % thing off-putting because it's an un-known. But I see the logic from an architect's perspective...usually extensions are more expensive because they are more complex, requiring more work for the architect. A client constantly changing their mind impacts the architect in a fixed price agreement . What I'd like is to agree a fixed price based on the agreed plans. The architect should provide an estimated cost to any changes after that - then the client can decide if they really want that change.



Many architects have done just this, and its not so much the actual changes that eat up your fee income as it is the discussions about all *possible* changes with the client.
I assess the client and raise my initial fee proposal to reflect my estimation if the client seems very demanding - I have seldom over-estimated my additional costs. 

Extensions can be more complex than a new build, because of the marrying in of structure, space and services.
And the snagging on extensions tends to be much more onerous than on new builds for some reason.
Given the square footage basis, extensions are more expensive than new builds.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                      as a defence or support - in and of itself - should       legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                      Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports  on     the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## Complainer (2 Oct 2010)

onq said:


> In  relation to your photographer, he is entitled to copyright his work, as  I am my drawings. If you're using his work for personal enjoyment and  not commercial gain, I see no reason why he would charge you for each  use. If OTOH you are using the work repeatedly for commercial gain, he  is entitled to charge for its use according to my understanding of how  that profession works.


That's how the profession USED to work, when clients where foolish and generous enough to go along with restrictive practices. When I engage a photographer, the contract specifies unlimited perpetual licence to use the photographs. I pay the photographer for his work, and I get to use the products in any way I like. This requirement is clearly specified up-front, and the photographer can set his fee accordingly.

Some photographers (particularly older ones) get a bit snooty about this. The smart photographers do job, deliver the goods, and take the money and run.



onq said:


> In  relation to your photographer, he is entitled to copyright his work, as  I am my drawings. If you're using his work for personal enjoyment and  not commercial gain, I see no reason why he would charge you for each  use. If OTOH you are using the work repeatedly for commercial gain, he  is entitled to charge for its use according to my understanding of how  that profession works.
> 
> B)
> 
> ...



I have quite a lot to say about your response, but in the interests of clarity, let me focus on one particular issue. Perhaps my original question wasn't clear.

I thinking about a scenario where the price increases during the build project for reasons that require no involvement or extra work by the architect. Let's face it, price increases during a build project are more the norm than the exception. So where an architect has quoted a % fee, and the builder's price increases during the project (for reasons that require NO extra work by the architect), what happens to the architect's fee at the end of the project?


----------



## onq (3 Oct 2010)

Complainer said:


> That's how the profession USED to work, when clients where foolish and generous enough to go along with restrictive practices. When I engage a photographer, the contract specifies unlimited perpetual licence to use the photographs. I pay the photographer for his work, and I get to use the products in any way I like. This requirement is clearly specified up-front, and the photographer can set his fee accordingly.
> 
> Some photographers (particularly older ones) get a bit snooty about this. The smart photographers do job, deliver the goods, and take the money and run.



"Yield to me the copyright to your work or you don't get the contract"?

Do you give the photographer the credit for his work on the reproductions?

Depending on your answer I'll have a lot more to say on this.



> I have quite a lot to say about your response, but in the interests of clarity, let me focus on one particular issue. Perhaps my original question wasn't clear.
> 
> I thinking about a scenario where the price increases during the build project for reasons that require no involvement or extra work by the architect. Let's face it, price increases during a build project are more the norm than the exception. So where an architect has quoted a % fee, and the builder's price increases during the project (for reasons that require NO extra work by the architect), what happens to the architect's fee at the end of the project?


If the fee is quoted in a particular year for say, a five year project, it is advisable that fees should be index-linked to reflect the cost of production of the work in later years.

Otherwise, if this is simply a local short term price increase affecting materials only, then no, I personally don't raise my fees.

That having been said, in one particular project that spanned five years we agreed a monthly retainer and stuck to it.

Other firms may do it differently.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                       as a defence or support - in and of itself -  should       legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                       Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports   on     the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## Complainer (3 Oct 2010)

onq said:


> "Yield to me the copyright to your work or you don't get the contract"?
> 
> Do you give the photographer the credit for his work on the reproductions?
> 
> Depending on your answer I'll have a lot more to say on this.


Close enough. The photographer retains the copyright by law. The tender and the contract specify that the photographer grants the payer unlimited perpetual rights to use the photographs in any medium, and the photographer agrees not to use the photos for any other purpose without written permission.

And no, the photographer is not credit for his work. Neither are the colleagues who write the document. Nor the proof-reader who proofs it. Nor the designer who designs it. Nor the van-driver who delivers it. What's so special about photographers?


onq said:


> If the fee is quoted in a particular year for say, a five year project, it is advisable that fees should be index-linked to reflect the cost of production of the work in later years.
> 
> Otherwise, if this is simply a local short term price increase affecting materials only, then no, I personally don't raise my fees.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the clarification. I'm wondering if most other firms take the same approach. There is also the issue of the impact at design stage. If the architect's fee is based on a % of the final cost, there is certainly a temptation to gild the lily, or design in features that result in increased costs. I certainly wouldn't retain any professional advisor on that kind of contract.


----------



## onq (4 Oct 2010)

Complainer said:


> Close enough. The photographer retains the copyright by law. The tender and the contract specify that the photographer grants the payer unlimited perpetual rights to use the photographs in any medium, and the photographer agrees not to use the photos for any other purpose without written permission.
> 
> And no, the photographer is not credit for his work. Neither are the colleagues who write the document. Nor the proof-reader who proofs it. Nor the designer who designs it. Nor the van-driver who delivers it. What's so special about photographers?



Professionals are credited for the work they do on the fly sheet of a publication.
How else will people know who to go to for such excellent photographs?



> Thanks for the clarification. I'm wondering if most other firms take the same approach. There is also the issue of the impact at design stage. If the architect's fee is based on a % of the final cost, there is certainly a temptation to gild the lily, or design in features that result in increased costs. I certainly wouldn't retain any professional advisor on that kind of contract.


You're very welcom, Complainer.

It seems to me that someone working from first principles has spun this out to an unsupportable degree.

Yes, you may get someone seeking high standards of material and workmanship, knowing that this will reflect on a higher fee.
But you'd have to be a pretty clueless client not to see that for what it is, Complainer.
The client sets the brief, the QS reports to the design team on costs and the client is free to peruse all the documents on which a cost estimate is done.
If you didn't spot the solid gold taps in the specification more fool you.

But equally, if you agreed the general standard of the specification before the design work standard [and you are at all times free ot do this] then the architect was obliged ot take this into account.
When I say "obliged" I don't mean a waffly "obliged" I mean this is part of his duty of care once he accepts your instruction - to do right by you and not artificially inflate the price to invoke higher fees for his own benefit.

It is precisely to police unscrupulous behaviour like this that the Building Control Act 2007 requres all architectsto be registered.
It remains to be seen how effective this is, but equally having worked as an architect for over twenty years in Ireland I resent the implication that any architect would hike up the spec to increase fees.

This has nothing to do with their moral standing per se - its just the way the building industry is.
Having worked at the hard face of commercial design I can tell you that neither commercial not private house clients are uninformed and you would be shown the door if they even suspected you would try that on.

Nor do I hear anyone here actually citing cases where this has occurred - more a "its nonayur business" attitude coupled with an unwillingness to retain building professionals to save money, thinking they can "do it all" themselves.
It was partly to try and better inform people what they were getting into if thye did that which prompted me to write the Self-Build FAQ.

And I wrote it for _free_, Complainer, just as all my advice here is for _free_ - percentages aren't in it! 

But in general, there are levelling drifts in prices for work and many of hte percentage fee agreements are done on the basis of industry-standard costings for similar kinds of buildings, something along the lines of the Brude Shaw Handbook [q.v.]

You've seen this levelling drift here, with a reasonable price for good work on private dwellings falling within a range either side of €100 per sq.ft.
It stands to reason that if your house is coming in much over €150 per sq.ft. then you need to be looking at the cost estimates again to see where the higher prices arise.
You'd be mad to agree to a percentage based on an inflated price.

But the corollary is also true.
If your house is coming in at €65 per square foot because some builder is cutting his throat to get the work, don't expect your architect to agree to a fee based on such a low cost base.
Come to think of it, don't expect the builder to stay in business very long either.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                        as a defence or support - in and of itself -   should       legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                        Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports    on     the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## Complainer (8 Oct 2010)

onq said:


> Professionals are credited for the work they do on the fly sheet of a publication.
> How else will people know who to go to for such excellent photographs?


So now I'm supposed to give him free advertising space in my publication so he can get more business? No chance, I'm afraid.



onq said:


> You're very welcom, Complainer.
> 
> It seems to me that someone working from first principles has spun this out to an unsupportable degree.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the clarifications. Perhaps you're right, and the client should be able to spot any attempts to bump up the spec/fee. I'm just wondering why the client should have to be worried about this kind of vigilance. Why not just a straight fixed fee amount?


----------



## onq (8 Oct 2010)

Complainer,

Its hard enough to get work without clients being unwilling to give references in publications which use it. It is customary practice to give credit for cerative or graphic work and more shame on your photographer for not demanding it from you and on you for being so relucant to give it, never mind offer it - what does it cost you?

As for clients being vigilant and your inference that this shouldn't happen - nonsense, there is a risk of it happening in every profession and every business.
We all have to be vigilant on all fronts otherwise we'll get taken for a ride - and this is more likely, not less likely, in a recession.

If people were vigilant it wouldn't be so easy for prices to be inflated by retailers.
Look at the nonsense that was exposed a couple of Christmases ago [or was it last Christmas] when the Euro and Pound Sterling were near parity and the overcharging in Dublin High Street stores was exposed for all to see.

Professionals have to make money too, and in the building industry - as is now PAINFULLY OBVIOUS  - the money you make in the good times has to support you through the lean times.
Bills don't stop and kids still have to be educated in a recession.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon  as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be  taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in  Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at  hand.


----------



## Complainer (8 Oct 2010)

onq said:


> Its hard enough to get work without clients being unwilling to give references in publications which use it. It is customary practice to give credit for cerative or graphic work and more shame on your photographer for not demanding it from you and on you for being so relucant to give it, never mind offer it - what does it cost you?


No shame on me at all, at all. Shame on those who blindly follow 'customary' restrictive practices with any professionals. About time we stood up to these professionals. The cost to me is the distraction from the message of my publication - I don't pay the costs of publishing to help people to find photographers. I want to focus people's minds on the core message of my publication. I also need to be fair to ALL the people involved in this publication - why should I credit the photographer, but not credit the designer, the authors, the consultees, the printer, the proof reader and the van driver. They all played key roles in getting the publication into the right hands - why does the photographer get a credit and not the others? For the record, the photographers that I use are very happy to work with me, and happy to come back and quote for repeat business again and again. 

You're right indeed that clients need to be vigilant about everything. If it was me, I'd start my vigilance at the charging structure.


----------



## onq (8 Oct 2010)

I don't know what kind of publication you are referring to Complainer.
I wouldn't expect it on a newsletter but a good piece of advertising yes and looking at the fly sheets on books shows the rest of the credits.
In fact the introduction to a good buke usually lists the main people who assisted in its production.
I'm not sure where you think you're being ripped off on fees, but when you look at the earning potential of students in college, its nil and many professionals work long years before reaching any kind of decent earning potential.

Your general rant against fees causes some concern.
You seem to be pushing an agenda that isn't based in fact and I'm not going down this road here.
If you want to start a separate thread in an appropriate forum on this, I'll join you there.

But post facts, not opinions, and maybe then we can review like with like, such as the failure of many businesses to drop their prices in a recession.


ONQ.


----------



## Complainer (8 Oct 2010)

onq said:


> I don't know what kind of publication you are referring to Complainer.
> I wouldn't expect it on a newsletter but a good piece of advertising yes and looking at the fly sheets on books shows the rest of the credits.
> In fact the introduction to a good buke usually lists the main people who assisted in its production.


In my case, the publications are booklets - 40-100 pages in size - technical guidance, research reports, standards etc - generally aimed at a professional audience. Some printed in hard-copy, some web only. 

Every page costs money, so we're not going to adding pages to thank the world and their wives.


onq said:


> I'm not sure where you think you're being ripped off on fees, but when you look at the earning potential of students in college, its nil and many professionals work long years before reaching any kind of decent earning potential.
> 
> Your general rant against fees causes some concern.
> You seem to be pushing an agenda that isn't based in fact and I'm not going down this road here.
> ...


I think we've beaten this one to death.


----------



## Flower Girl (15 Nov 2010)

I don't understand why complainer doesn't take his/her own photographs in the first place?
Then, issues of copyright would be off the table....


----------



## Complainer (15 Nov 2010)

Flower Girl said:


> I don't understand why complainer doesn't take his/her own photographs in the first place?


For the same reason as I don't code my own websites, audit my own accounts, represent myself in court, design my own extensions etc - because

a) I recognise the added-value that a professional photographer brings
b) I don't have professional photography equipment
c) I'm a bit too busy with my day job to take time out for all the photography.


----------



## Firefly (16 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> For the same reason as I don't code my own websites, audit my own accounts, represent myself in court, design my own extensions etc - because
> 
> a) I recognise the added-value that a professional photographer brings
> b) I don't have professional photography equipment
> c) I'm a bit too busy with my day job to take time out for all the photography.



2 outta 3 ain't bad


----------



## JeanKelly (9 Jul 2012)

rosemartin said:


> i have just completed 40sq m two story extension and major internal revoations for a building cost of €43,000,  the kit out cost me €18,000, new kitchen,bathroom, tiles, flooring,etc..etc.  my archetict charged me a flat rate for  drawing up plans and dealing with planning.got my planning within two months.   it was eight months later when got finances toghter for building work. he then charged me 187plus vat for site visits which there were three to certify works for staged payments.
> 
> no question of mileage he had to travel 25miles, overall cost just short of 2700




Rose these prices sound great. We want to get a two storey extension ([FONT=&quot]approx 31 metres squared per floor)[/FONT] and my husband has found an architect (who's coming out tomorrow, €200 for the initial visit) who is looking for approx €4,000 for just the plans, think the full package to the completion of the build is around €10,000. These prices seem to me crazy compared to what you paid! Id love the contact details of your guy. The cost of your build also looks great too


----------



## lowCO2design (9 Jul 2012)

JeanKelly said:


> Rose these prices sound great. We want to get a two storey extension ([FONT=&quot]approx 31 metres squared per floor)[/FONT] and my husband has found an architect (who's coming out tomorrow, €200 for the initial visit) who is looking for approx €4,000 for just the plans, think the full package to the completion of the build is around €10,000. These prices seem to me crazy compared to what you paid! Id love the contact details of your guy. The cost of your build also looks great too


hold on a minute
you have to quanitfy what level of service is being provided, what the actual scope of the project is, and what the actual budget is


----------

