Architect Invoice Much Higher than Expected - Options?

[greido]

I've had architect plans drawn up for an extension to my 1930s bungalow in Edinburgh, the plans for the extension are fine but there is poorly planned previous loft conversion upstairs that could potentially be rectified whilst the single-story extension is built on the ground floor.

To cut a long story short, the architect assured me that the cost of replacing the roof and reconfiguring the rooms upstairs would be relatively cheap...... Turns out the builder’s tenders did not agree with that assertion and subsequently made the project financially unviable meaning that despite having planning permission and building warrant in place, I need to amend the upstairs plans.

I spoke to the architect and stated my desire to add an en suite and a few extra Velux windows upstairs to keep the costs down but they then stated that they could come up with a cost-effective solution that didn't involve replacing he roof, it would only take 'a few hours' and I'd have the drawings by the end of the week.

After several chases, two months passed and I eventually got the plans which did not significantly reduce the build costs and only cemented my thoughts that minimal work on the upstairs was the way forward, however, I've now been hit with a bill for 15 hours labour so my cost cutting exercise is being billed at >£1000. I did not agree to this and was led to believe it was a quick amendment and the drawings produced have not addressed my queries and further drawings would be required (at a cost) to get a detailed tender and structural queries have yet to be addressed. 

What are my options? - The bill does not seem proportionate to what are drawing amendments and I never agreed to commission work on this scale.

Apologies for the rather long-winded post but I wanted to provide some context.

Thanks in advance for any advice or opinions offered.

[Temp]

Do you have any of the discussion in writing?

[Gus Potter]

Hello greido.

 

I'm a bit west (in EK) of you but here are a few observations... and a bit of a story. It's a bit late so a bit of food for thought. I'll work through your post.

 

Circa 1930 bungalow. I used to live in Edinburgh but in the 1930's they were still skint after the first war to say the least . Some bungalow roofs were still built using the pre first war method and rules of thumb to size the rafters and so on. This gave you a roof that was more conducive to modern conversion. But in the 30's they started to introduce lighter weight roofs. The intrinsic difference being that the sizes of the timbers were much reduced as they had worked out to some extent how to make the roofs function more like a modern day prefabicated roof truss. I'm cutting out a lot of detail here.

 

From memory (happy to be corrected) if you take say the Blackhall area they were still building the roofs the traditional way, slightly steeper pitches with larger timber sizes and so on. But in other areas they adopted the lighter weight roofs. Here the floor joists forming the attic floor / rafters were thinner and the position of what we call the soldiers (the upright bits) , collars were relocated in such a manner that they are "in the way" when you want to convert the loft. As soon as you move these the forces in the main members of the roof change significantly, and just as importantly, the forces in the connections change such that they often no longer work when you try and move the soldiers etc. This introduces difficulty / complexity and thus extra cost.

 

Now much depends on what type of roof you have as they are two different animals. I'm just guessing, but the previous loft conversion you have may be long standing and would not pass muster when compared with the modern standards when it come to converting the loft.

 

The first approach mentions "replacing the roof", I assume that means that the whole roof is to come off. Doing this can give you much more scope to change the internal layout of the attic. It's also easier to estimate the price.

 

But, it can often be much harder and more labour intensive to keep the existing main roof structure intact. If you have the lighter 1930's type of roof the rafters are shallower for example.. this makes it harder to design the insulation, deal with the condensation risk, ventilation of the sloping part of the roof and so on.. at attic floor level you often need to do a lot of strengthening and often there are a load of services in the way.. builders know this and charge accordingly.

 

Turning now to the indication that your Architect gave regarding retaining the existing roof. Being pragmatic and speaking from experience. To do this takes much more thought and drawing effort. Often you think you have "cracked it" then you start drawing it / doing the detailed calculations and realise that there is a spanner in the works.. it can take sometimes days to figure it out! I suspect that your Architect may have fallen into this trap!

 

It may be worth while being pragmatic. If you have a good personal relationship with your Architect then discuss it. They may be a bit less experienced at pricing their time ( just starting out on their own maybe) but great designers, maybe they are not the best sales folk and in their desire to please promise more than they can deliver. Discuss it with them if you feel you can. If that does not work out then consider meeting them half way and put it down to experience. You can refuse to pay and play hard ball but it will give you stress.. maybe best to move on.

 

If you choose to move on then consider contacting an experienced SE who knows how to convert lofts and what the options / costs are as you seem to already have a conceptual scheme.

 

Lastly, although you may feel you have had a bit of a setback try and enjoy the process as much as you can.. it is rewarding.

 

All the best.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AliG]

I think you have to go back to him and say that 15 hours is not a "few" hours and that whilst you understand he may have done more work than expected you need him to adjust the bill to be closer to what was quoted. Maybe 10 hours would be a good compromise, this is still more than most people's definition of a few. If he also said that he would produce these drawings with the express purpose of coming up with a lower cost option and has not achieved this he really has not done a great job, especially as it sounds like it was his suggestion.

 

In my real life experience as well as from watching the various building related TV shows architects are just not good at estimating building costs. Renovating an existing house where there are more unknowns probably exacerbates this issue.

 

I am in Edinburgh, I hadn't seen your original post, welcome. Frankly a lot of the loft conversions on these older bungalows are awful, you end up sleeping with you face a couple of feet away from the roof. The trouble you have in replacing the roof is that it will be very expensive for little extra space. I would guess you are looking at around £40k to remove the existing roof, build the new roof, tile and insulate it.  By the time you then fit out bedrooms, add windows, en suites etc this would rise to more like £70k. I am assuming that you are covering a ground floor area between 120 and 150 sq metres when I think of the floorplan of a typical Edinburgh bungalow. And of course as a renovation you have to pay VAT. Actually if you move the roof you will also have to redo the guttering and soffits which might add a bit more again to the cost. Adding extra ground floor space likely has a lot better return.

 

 

 

 

[TonyT]

Ask for a copy of his time sheet/diary.

let’s be  honest he/she is opening up an electronic drawing and making some changes, not getting a fresh sheet of paper out and drawing it again.

 

 

or say you will pay 8 hrs, and tell them to jog on..or they get nothing.

[Ferdinand]

1 hour ago, TonyT said:

Ask for a copy of his time sheet/diary.

let’s be  honest he/she is opening up an electronic drawing and making some changes, not getting a fresh sheet of paper out and drawing it again.

 

 

or say you will pay 8 hrs, and tell them to jog on..or they get nothing.

 

I would not be that sharp elbowed with a professional; it may put noses out of joint.

 

If he gets narked, you could be for small claims "as a mattter of principle".

 

As a better option, perhaps if -- once your conversation is deadlocked - there may be a professional arbitration scheme via his registration body.

 

If you offer that it will give the A 2 separate "outs" - a reduction or binding arbitration. Negotiating 101 - offer 2 options, both of which are suitable for you.

 

[the_r_sole]

This is good illustration of why hourly rates are the worst way to work with creative consultants as I said in a different thread yesterday - the attitude is "they're only opening up a cad file and knocking some lines around" so it's not taking any time, which isn't really the case at all.

However, in this instance if it's a "few hours" which has turned into a couple of days then there's a big issue! Is there anything in writing as to what they were doing and how they would approach it? (when i worked in edinburgh I had this situation a few times as the company insisted on hourly rates for changes to projects and it usually ended up with producing timesheets to justify to clients what had been done, then a negotiation to get to an agreed settlement etc - i.e. more time on admin than was spent on the work!!)

Are they registered architects?

 

[Buzz]

50 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

If you offer that it will give the A 2 separate "outs" - a reduction or binding arbitration. Negotiating 101 - offer 2 options, both of which are suitable for you.

 

+1 to this, had a difficult conversation with our architects yesterday long story short we can have a new designer to finish our plans and take to planning, or walk away and receive a 50% refund in fees paid.

Know what you would be happy with before you make the call and always follow up with and email starting, as per conversation ……

[ToughButterCup]

9 hours ago, greido said:

...

What are my options? -

 

Look at your Terms of Engagement (might be in an Engagement Letter).

As @the_r_sole was hinting above, if the architect is registered and is indeed an architect, then the company will have to follow the sector professional guidelines.

Your options should (might)  be explained in the Terms of Engagement.

[TonyT]

Great as they are a ‘professional’ complain to their governing body. So when they start the small claims you are in first.

just cause they come to site with shiny shoes doesn’t mean they can’t be told what to do.

 

 

[the_r_sole]

3 minutes ago, TonyT said:

Great as they are a ‘professional’ complain to their governing body. So when they start the small claims you are in first.

just cause they come to site with shiny shoes doesn’t mean they can’t be told what to do.

 

 

It's certainly one way to end the job and not get anything done for all the spend so far - along with adding months to resolving the issue at hand. 

[PeterW]

24 minutes ago, TonyT said:

Great as they are a ‘professional’ complain to their governing body. So when they start the small claims you are in first.

just cause they come to site with shiny shoes doesn’t mean they can’t be told what to do.

 

 

Well technically they can ... and unless this is an “agreed in writing” then the OP has very little by way of leverage. 
 

As @the_r_sole says, it’s a sure fire way of grinding everything to a halt. 
 

@greido what is the main issue here ..? Is it that you have a budget that you gave the architect and they ignored it, and you now have a scheme that is twice as expensive; or is it that you asked them to simplify and they have charged you £1000 and it’s still much more than the budget ..? 
 

Main questions for me would be did you tell them the budget at the outset, and is it a realistic budget ..? I’ve seen plenty of requests for extensions and conversions where the budget and expectation is £600-1000/sqm, and the actual pricing comes in nearer £2000/sqm for something pretty simple.
 

Unless you are going to be very hands on, the cost of partial demolition can sometimes double the cost of a scheme as materials are removed by hand and it takes twice as long to remove and stack for re-use and the costs outweigh the pricing of using new or reclaimed materials. Likewise with trying to retain ceilings in loft conversions - it can add £1-2000 in labour  to ensure they are not damaged when patching and re-skimming would be half of that and get a better and more consistent finish. 
 

It would be useful to know the brief you gave the architect at the outset, as this is normally where the problems stem from as expectations rarely meet reality. 

[TonyT]

Grind to a halt? The building hasn’t started yet, get a local builder who does this as their bread and butter.

A quick search engine search throws up a few that do the planning and all trades

in one company

chasing architects for months, overcharging, sounds like an expensive mistress to me.. get rid.

[greido]

All, many thanks for all comments, I really appreciate everyone for taking the time and making the effort to reply, please see responses below to the queries raised:

@Temp: “Do you have any of the discussion in writing?” – No, just email chasers from me with responses along the lines of: “’We’re really busy”, Will get back to you this week”, “I’ve been on holiday”, “will get something to you today/tomorrow”.

 

@Gus Potter: - “if you take say the Blackhall area they were still building the roofs the traditional way” – I’m very close to Blackhall, my house appears to be the same as the typical build as you’ve described.

 

@Gus Potter: “the previous loft conversion you have may be long standing and would not pass muster when compared with the modern standards” – Correct, the staircase is too narrow,900mm, therefore, would not pass current building standards. I have been advised by the architect that if a dormer (to an existing upstairs bedroom) and shower room were added, a new staircase would be required as there would be more than a single occupancy assumed. However, if only a shower room and additional velux windows were added, there would be no assumption of more than single occupancy and subsequently no need to change the staircase.

 

@the_r_sole: Are they registered architects: They are Architectural Designers and Charted Planning Consultants.

 

@PeterW: ‘What is the main issue?’ – Cost is the main concern, not only receiving a >£1,000 bill for ‘a few hours work’ but also the cost estimates I had received previously when discussing the roof replacement were extremely inaccurate, the original drawings were amended to allow for the new roof and these too cost several thousand pounds and are will ultimately be of no use to me as it will not be economically viable to add the new roof.

From the outset, the number one constraint of the project was to add value to the property, not to make a profit on it but rather to ensure that any capital outlay could be realised by increased value upon completion…… Basically, not to make a loss on the project.

The before the plans were drawn up and submitted for planning, I received a high-level estimate of cost from the architect which turned nowhere near the values of the tenders I received, hence the desire to reduce the cost on the upstairs by working with the existing loft conversion and not replacing the roof.

I then suggested only extending downstairs and making some relatively minor alteration upstairs, it was at this point that I was told they could come up with an alternative plan for upstairs that would be cost effective and ‘only take a few hours’ to draw up. Subsequently a few hours became 15 and the new proposal did significantly reduce the cost and the plans received require further work to get them to a detailed state where they could be used for detailed tenders.

The updated draft drawings also required further input from a structural engineer If I wanted to progress with the proposal (The Structural Engineer had originally taken 5 months to deliver his drawings and at a cost significantly more than was originally quoted (to be fair, the scope had increased but not to an extent that the end invoice was double the original estimate, I my opinion).

 

As has been stated above by @AliG, architects are not good at estimating costs; unfortunately, as a complete novice when I started this project, I was unaware of this and thought that I was receiving sound advice.

@TonyT – “Grind to a halt? The building hasn’t started yet, get a local builder who does this as their bread and butter.

A quick search engine search throws up a few that do the planning and all trades

in one company

chasing architects for months, overcharging, sounds like an expensive mistress to me.. get rid.“ – Sounds like good advice, thanks.

 

My intended next steps are to reach out to the architect to discuss the matter, in all honesty, I haven’t done so until now as I was furious when I received the unexpected invoice and I never like to have a discussion when in that frame of mind, though I can usually get over things a bit quicker than I have with this.

Again, let me reiterate my gratitude to you all for your responses and apologies for such a long- winded response.

[lineweight]

41 minutes ago, greido said:

 

@the_r_sole: Are they registered architects: They are Architectural Designers and Charted Planning Consultants.

 

Then they are not registered architects. Technically they should not be describing themselves to you as "Architects".

 

It sounds like you agreed that they should do some more work (a few hours) to find a less expensive solution for you, and they did that, and succeeded in proposing something less expensive?

 

So the dispute you have is whether 15 hours is "a few hours". I think that 15 hours is more than "a few hours" so it is fair for you to challenge them on that. If they failed to explain to you that the revised designs would then require further detailed input from them and the structural engineer - then I think they should have been clear to you about that, if you are a domestic rather than professional client.

 

But I'd state to them how it looks from your perspective, why you are not entirely happy and see how they respond. Their response might inform whether you want to continue with them. The relationship between designer and client on a domestic project requires some level of trust in both directions.

 

Don't assume that you'll necessarily have a better experience with a building company, as has been suggested. You might or might not. There are plenty of building companies who fail to respond to communication, or present extra costs without warning, or who don't stick to agreements. Of course there are also excellent builders out there.

[TonyT]

It’s a loft extension, the builders who do this day in day out will have a better understanding of what’s achievable and at what cost.

 

The builders will know that plumbing will have to be altered, electrics upgraded etc and have real life costs for this using local trades.

I lived in Edinburgh for 9 years and know what trades are available( 15 years ago anyway)?

[the_r_sole]

9 hours ago, TonyT said:

It’s a loft extension, the builders who do this day in day out will have a better understanding of what’s achievable and at what cost.

 

The builders will know that plumbing will have to be altered, electrics upgraded etc and have real life costs for this using local trades.

I lived in Edinburgh for 9 years and know what trades are available( 15 years ago anyway)?

 

They will indeed but I've not met very many of them that can knock out a compensatory u-value calc for a loft conversion, or even understand the principles of it... sometimes it's not possible to build the cheapest way, or the way you've done things before with a loft conversion which is generally what contractors would rely on - I've seen a lot of loft conversions done which aren't built to the warrant specs and had trouble at completion stage.

[the_r_sole]

10 hours ago, greido said:

 

@the_r_sole: Are they registered architects: They are Architectural Designers and Charted Planning Consultants.

 

 

 

That's annoying then, as they probably don't have any formal complaints process or code of conduct etc, hopefully if you raise the issue with them they will be reasonable but after that you might find it's difficult - not sure if anything in a chartered planning consultant remit would help you out here, but guess they would have a complaints procedure?

[lineweight]

11 minutes ago, the_r_sole said:

 

They will indeed but I've not met very many of them that can knock out a compensatory u-value calc for a loft conversion, or even understand the principles of it... sometimes it's not possible to build the cheapest way, or the way you've done things before with a loft conversion which is generally what contractors would rely on - I've seen a lot of loft conversions done which aren't built to the warrant specs and had trouble at completion stage.

 

Nor are they likely to give you a proper set of scale drawings so that you can know exactly what you are supposed to be getting, before they start work.

[TonyT]

http://www.ttconstruction.co.uk/attic-conversions.html

 

real hard...

[the_r_sole]

18 minutes ago, TonyT said:

http://www.ttconstruction.co.uk/attic-conversions.html

 

real hard...

 

They use local architects, not provided in house - so you still have an architect doing the design and specifications...