BLOG

Blog

Pro-bono work and PJs

Pro-bono jobs are done without a fee.  Or perhaps at some concessional fee such as meeting basic costs but not time and labour.  Do not assume that because you are gifting your skills and resources, those that might make a claim against you will take an equally charitable approach.  Your responsibilities are the same, and the other risks remain the same, regardless of whether fees are paid or not.

“PJs”  (private jobs) are a time-honoured way that employees widen their experience or carry out work for friends and family.  An employee acting in the “normal course of their employment” would generally be protected by the employer’s PI cover:  that would exclude PJs.  An employee doing work on their own account will be carrying the risk, and it is up to them whether they are insured or not. 

But the problem is that in the event of a claim, the employer – even if unaware of the project – is likely to be in the claimant’s cross-hairs.  Employers should deal with these matters in their staff terms of engagement.  Written consent of the directors should be a precondition for staff to engage in related business interests, and all subsequent arrangements should be in writing:  a congenial/collegial chat is not sufficient.

The employer, if allowing staff to carry out PJs, should:

Remind such staff of the risks of carrying out professional work without the protection of insurance;  and of the necessity to meet the requirements of the NZRAB Code of Ethics.

Insist that the client is made aware that the practice is not involved in the project – perhaps by drafting a letter to the client – and should keep a written copy of that communication. 

Make clear that there must be no use of office reputation and/or intellectual property, materials, addresses, details, resources, staff, or management.

Confirm that using your firm in any way comes as a cost to the firm which could either be classed as stealing or employee benefit, as may be agreed (or not).

Watch out for watermarks on prints, email signatures, digital files, timesheet records, etc..

Require that any and all communications in respect of the project should be through a job-specific email address, and not refer to or be recorded in or be part of the office system.

The better course of action may be to encourage the employee to bring the project into the office, along with whatever arrangements might be required in respect of fee-sharing or rewards, including the level of responsibility within the firm for that job.  The firm still needs to take care in monitoring actions and communications between employee and client:  there is the likelihood some will be “informal” and outside usual office circumstances.   

Renewal – Indemnity levels

The level of cover is for your practice, for all projects for the insurance year.  PI cover does not relate to individual projects, but if you need to, you can increase your cover at any stage during the year.

A key decision you need to make is the level of cover you are seeking.  Some clients are requiring a minimum level of cover, and if you want to work with them you will need to carry that level of cover in order to meet the terms of engagement.  Otherwise, it is a matter of the risk you are prepared to carry, versus the cost of passing that risk to an insurer.

The purpose of the PI cover is to protect your assets and business in the event of a claim.  You need to think carefully before exposing those resources to risk.  A doubling of your cover (for example) would typically be at a marginal cost (maybe 20-50%) and not a doubling of the premium.  

Many smaller practices and sole traders are tempted to limit PI cover to the minimum $250k set out in the NZIA AAS agreements.  But those practices also tend to be doing residential work, where the liability will NOT be capped at $250k, because the Consumer Guarantees Act exposes those practices to unlimited liability.  Yes, you might attempt to hide behind a family trust or a limited liability company to avoid the prospect of becoming personally liable for that part of a successful claim in excess of $250k.  BUT claimants have successfully recovered money on the basis that a beneficiary to a trust has the resources of the trust available to meet a claim.  AND if you were a director of the company and personally involved in the failed project, then the prospect of a personal claim against you is very real. 

Thinking about changing Insurance Provider?

Insurance is a mechanism of transferring your risk to another party i.e. an insurer. In exchange for consideration, often referred to as ‘premium’ the insurance company will agree to pay an agreed sum of money, referred to as an indemnity, when an event or events happen.
The insurance policy is a contract agreement and like any form of contract sets out the terms of agreement; what the contract is for, when to call on the contract, and the types of events covered, as well as the types of events not covered.
This commentary focusses on Professional Indemnity insurance and factors to consider if contemplating changing insurance provider.

Policy Coverage
Professional Indemnity insurance (PI) policies offer cover on a negligence or civil liability basis. Civil liability policies are the most common policies and cover a broad range of risks.
For Architects, Architectural Designers or Draughtspersons, claims can have allegations of negligence, breach of the duty of care that a client could reasonably expect from you, defamation, breach of confidentiality, breach of copyright, breach of intellectual property, unfair competition or breach of contract.
In addition to paying the compensation claim “the settlement”, the PI insurance arranged through NZACS also provides cover for your associated defence costs. This includes lawyers’ fees and expert witness costs.
CHECK – Is the Policy
• Negligence only or Civil liability?
• Are the defence costs paid in addition to the Indemnity limit or part of the Indemnity limit?
• Does the policy include Quasi Judicial or Registration Board investigations or enquiries (such as NZRAB or LBP Board)?
(For the policies arranged through NZACS, the answers are “Negligence and civil liabilities”; “Yes”; “Yes”)
It isn’t just about the number of policy extensions a policy has. Often policy extensions are noted separately as a way of limiting or defining the cover and would already be included within the definition of the Insuring clause.
(The policies arranged through NZACS are specifically written around the risks faced by architects)
CHECK – What to look for:
• The policy needs to be read in its entirety. Insuring clauses and the definitions, extensions and exclusions and policy conditions.
• What is important for you and your practice?
• What do you need to have cover for and what is ‘nice to have’ but not essential?

Claims Made Basis
PI policies fall into a category of insurance known as ‘claims made’.
This means that you need to meet certain conditions to access the indemnity. These may differ policy to policy, and it is important that you understand your policy conditions if you are aware of a claim or circumstance and are thinking of changing provider.
Common policies require the following:
• You must have a current policy in place at the time a claim is made against you and/or you become aware of circumstances that could result in a claim being made against you.
• You must notify the claim or circumstance before the policy due date passes (the policy expires).
• The claim or circumstance must relate to a period after any policy Retroactive date.
• The notification must contain sufficient information to meet the policy claims conditions.
Retroactive date:
Claims can arise long after a project is complete. In most instances PI policies can offer indemnity for past projects, and this cover is given by way of a Retroactive date. It means that you are covered for claims that relate to your activities carried out from the retroactive date going forward.
CHECK – Maintain existing Retroactive date?
• Most insurers will accept your existing Retroactive date even if they are not your current provider.
• NZACS carries your existing Retroactive date into the new policy provided you provide evidence of current insurance and the Retroactive date.
Maintaining Continuous Cover
Try and avoid being uninsured i.e. allowing one policy lapse before you arrange the next one. If you become aware of a claim or circumstance during an uninsured period, then you will not have any insurance cover, even if it is related to a project you did when you had cover (such is the nature of “Claims Made”)
Insurers will accept your existing Retroactive date provided you do not have a prolonged period without insurance cover.
Claim Time
Claims are unforeseen and unexpected but if they happen then you will expect the insurance contract to make good on its obligations and indemnities.
Claims can be stressful, complicated and take a long time to resolve.
CHECK –
• What happens if I need to make a claim or circumstance?
• How much do I have to contribute towards the claim and when is it payable (your excess)
• What support in addition to policy cover can I get?
o How is my claim managed – what experience does my association/broker/insurer have in the types of claims someone in my profession could have?
o What experience are the lawyers should I need one?
o Do I get help mitigating the claim – often an experienced adviser can work with you to resolve the claim long before it reaches litigation?
(The NZACS Claims Committee is available to assist members insurers and lawyers in the event of a claim or threatened claim; the lawyers are all on a “panel” which has proven skills and experience in claims made against architects and engineers)
(This article was provided by Aon, the insurance brokers who manage the NZACS PI cover.)

RISK MANAGEMENT
Legal Issues & Risk Management

RISK MANAGEMENT
Legal Issues & Risk Management

CONTENTS:  This Webinar (September 2022)

LEGAL AND QUASI-LEGAL ISSUES

Negligence

Duty of care in contract

Unlimited exposure to domestic claims

Duty of care in tort

                Limitation defences       

                Joint & several liability

                Copyright

                NZRAB complaints procedures

Negligence

Failure to exercise reasonable skill, care and diligence.

Doing what others in similar circumstances would not have done.

Failure to do what others in similar circumstances would have done.

Negligence test

  • Was a duty of care owed to the claimant?            
    • Was that duty breached?
    • Did the claimant suffer a loss
    • Was the loss caused by the defendant?
    • Was the loss reasonably foreseeable?

All questions must be answered YES for claim to be established

Defences available

  • If one of the above five questions is answered NO
    • The claim is contractually barred (time or money)
    • The claim is statute barred (time limitation, etc)
    • The claimant contributed to the loss.

Duty of care in contract (1)

  •  Described in the contract: 

                hence importance of having written engagement terms

                and having them signed and returned by the client!

  • Described in the Building Act s14D  (responsibilities of designer) Responsible for ensuring that plans and specifications or advice (if followed) will result in compliance
  • Domestic projects:  described in the Consumer Guarantees Act:

                done with a reasonable level of skill and care

                fit for the purpose you and the customer agreed on

                cost a reasonable amount, if a price wasn’t agreed beforehand

                completed in reasonable time, if timeframe wasn’t set before.

Duty of care in contract (2)

  •  Domestic/Residential projects:

Under Consumer Guarantees Act, a $ limitation cap included in the terms of engagement (i.e. contract for service) for a residential project will be of no effect:  the liability cannot be capped.

In relation to residential contracts, the minimum/default building contract terms are set out in s6 of the Building (Residential Consumer Rights and Remedies) Regulations 2014, but under s362B of the Building Act, these do NOT apply to design.

Duty of care in tort

A tort arises when a party owing a duty of care to others breaches that obligation, and that breach results in a loss (or “damage”) to those others. Scope is established by case law, not (generally) by legislation

To whom do you owe a duty of care in tort?

It depends!  Basically, anyone who might foreseeably be affected by your actions

When does a duty of care arise?

It depends!  But if you are involved in your professional capacity, you are                                             expected to have regard for the interests of those affected by your actions, to the      extent that others in your profession would, if placed in a similar situation.

Duty of care in tort – Examples

Example 1 – Concurrent claim in contract and in tort: The architect designs a defective building, which the client on-sells to others. The new owners could bring a claim for damages against the client in contract (pre-sale representations) and against the architect in tort (duty of care to owners/users of the building).  The client could bring a claim against the architect in contract (design/observation failures), and in tort (duty of care extended beyond contract to include owners/users of the building).

Example 2 – Duty to WarnAn LBP Carpenter was working as an employee for the non-LBP building contractor who was “cutting corners” in a house weathertight remediation project.  The LBP Board decided that the LBP had a duty to inform the owner that some of that work was inadequate or defective. The Board had regard to the significance and potential outcomes arising out of the defective work.

Example 3 – The Disappearing DeveloperApartments and townhouses have been the source of numerous NZACS claims.  It is not unusual for the developer to be unable to fulfil a later claim by the new owners. The architects or designers (and the Council) are routinely called upon to make up the shortfall, on the basis that they owed a duty of care to the purchasers.

Joint and Several Tort Liability

                The Claimant:

  • may seek full recovery from each or any parties that contributed to the damages.
    • is not (usually) concerned about who pays (if anything) to make up settlement sum.
    • cannot claim more than their actual loss, nor for any loss caused by their own negligence.

                The Designer/Defendant:

  • is liable to the extent that they contributed to the damages.
    • is potentially 100% liable for the damages arising out of the design defects.
    • if not engaged for site observation, will not be liable for construction defects
    • if engaged for site observation, will be liable for the damages which arose as a result of their failure to observe, and take action

Joint and Several Tort Liability – Examples

Example 1 – Insolvency:  In a leaky building claim, all the defects were the result of poor construction.  The Council had signed off CCC.  During remediation, it became clear that the original building inspector should have picked up the defective work. The owner sued all and sundry, but only the Council had the funds available to meet any settlement.  The ratepayers paid for all of the remediation.

Example 2 – Inadequate detailing: Similar scenario, but the builder was still in business and had meagre assets. The designer had nothing to do with appointing the builder or attending to the construction phase of the project.  But the designer had failed to detail a critical junction, and the builder’s solution was the reason for the leaks. Settlement was proportional: 15% builder, 15% designer, 70% Council.

Example 3 – Contributory NegligenceThe designer had detailed the relationship between the garage door jambs and the strip drain across the garage door intended to catch surface water flowing down the drive. Damage was caused because that detail was not followed on site. But photos showed that the owners had failed to dispose of fallen leaves and failed to clear the strip drain, with the result that the same flooding and damage would have occurred regardless of the builder’s faults.  Remediation costs were apportioned accordingly.

Limitation Defense (1):

In relation to “building work” claims:

  • usual liability is 6 years from the time the work done      (diagram = “A”)
    • possibility of a 3 year “late knowledge” extension.                (diagram = “B”)
    • 10 year longstop is provided by the Building Act            (diagram = “C”)

Limitation Defense (2):

In contract:

Legal proceedings related to a breach of contract cannot commence after 6 years from the date of the act of omission.

Shorter limitation periods may be contractually agreed, but insurance cover will not respond to claims with a contractual limitation period beyond the statutory 6 years.

In tort:

Legal proceedings cannot commence after 3 years from when the facts giving rise to the claim were known or ought reasonably to have been known. 

Copyright

  • Generally, the person who commissions a work owns the copyright. 
    • NZIA AAS terms reverse that:  the architect owns the copyright, and the client has the right to use the design for the purpose intended by the engagement agreement. 
    • If you don’t have a signed AAS agreement, you may not be able to assert copyright.

Copyright:  Examples

  • AAS not signed: Architects had a specific agreement with clients which included terms that their project was to be unique.  The AAS was part of the agreed terms, but it was never signed.  The clients brought a copyright claim on the basis that their design was later used elsewhere.
    • Copyright assigned?  A project was designed by a director of a firm, who then left, taking the construction phase of the project with him.  A dispute arose over whether the copyright in the design was also transferred.
    • Product replication: A firm issued tenderers with a photo of a furniture item they required to be included in the priced contract.  The furniture designer claimed on the basis that they alone were to be the only possible suppliers of that item.

NZRAB Complaints

The test is negligence, NOT gross negligence.  This may be a low bar, and the complaint may proceed ahead of other dispute processes which might have confirmed the facts, circumstances and contract responsibilities.  It costs a client very little to complain, but involves a LOT or effort and angst to defend.      

BEWARE!

NZRAB Complaints – Examples

Example 1 – Testing the evidence:  The architect advised the client that alterations to their cross-lease property would require approval of the neighbours.  That did not happen.  The client held the architect liable for the resulting problems and the architect conceded in the hope of avoiding punitive costs of the NZRAB process.  When the case was properly tested in preparation for a Court hearing, it became apparent that the complainant’s assertions would have failed.

Example 2 – Leverage:  The architect designed two townhouses for the client:  one for profit and one for occupation. The client’s expectations did not match the commercial realities and they sought to cut their losses by seeking recovery from the architect on the grounds of poor performance.  Their chosen route was to lodge an NZRAB complaint (at minimal cost) as a prelude to court action and/or to gain concessions that might make court action unnecessary.

Example 3 – Having your own cake and eating it too:  The clients engaged the architect for design/observation/contract administration.  The documentation was done accordingly.  The clients then sought to cut costs by curtailing the construction-stage attendances of the architect.  This resulted in unresolved detailing, uncoordinated variations, cost escalations and intermittent site visits by the architect.  The NZRAB complaint was partly initiated because the architect declined to issue a practical completion certificate.

RISK MANAGEMENT -The Key Risks

CONTENTS: 

5 KEY RISKS

            Communication

            Information

            Performance

            Money

            Partial Services

PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY INSURANCE

NZACS CLAIMS EXAMPLES

Communication                

Engagement terms & scope of work

Changes to design brief  – consequences

Objectives:  Client, Architect, Consultant, Contractor 

Information              

Site and site controls;  covenants, cross-leases

Client & contractor history, priorities, expectations

Performance   

Yours:                                    design, observation, administration, estimates

Consultants:                        skills & resources, timing, communication

Contractors:                        attitude, capacity, timing, communication

Materials:                            limitations, junctions, costs, warranties, moisture

Project Manager:              passing the buck?

Money                          

Budgets and estimates

Variations, monetary allowances, unknowns

Payments versus progress and performance

Contractor insolvency

Fees disputes & lack of goodwill or empathy

Partial Services           

Documentation versus site requirements

Inability to pick up issues or control outcomes

Loss of relationship with project and client

Defence of claims without first-hand knowledge

PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY INSURANCE

  • Responds only to risks arising out of the normal course of business
  • Does not respond to contracted risks beyond those normally accepted
  • Long tail (tale!):  Liability may not be quantified until years later
  • “Claims Made” basis:  Policy must be current when events which give rise to a claim first become known to the insured.
  • Policy holder has a duty to notify as soon as circumstances are known
  • Policy holder has a duty to assist in the resolution of the claim

NZACS

  • A co-operative run by and for architects, with group purchasing power and ability to influence PI policy terms.
  • In operation 50 years, now covers 70% or more of architecture firms + some designers
  • Claims Committee is available to assist members with actual or potential claims, and to provide architectural experience to their resolution by the insurers.
  • Publishes Communique – advice and guidance in Risk Management
  • Website resources at www.nzacs.co.nz

NZACS CLAIM EXAMPLES: 

Communication

  1. Architect appointed to major upgrade/refurbishment project spanning several years, multiple revisions of design brief by a changing client management team:  design required to evolve with aspects of the work uncovered during construction.  Project manager appointed after site operations started:  later multiple problems because context and responsibilities changed and not reliably documented by the parties.  When it comes to a claim, what is in writing is what counts!
  • Architect sends terms of engagement and fees proposal to client;  client instructs the work to proceed (either directly, or by actions in continuing to review and comment on the design) but never actually signs and returns the service contract, or continues to debate its terms.  Architect proceeds in good faith.  Project terminated because:  (a) the designs are never going to meet expectations or (b) getting the required resource consent is too hard or (c) costs are running ahead of budget or (d) divorce is pending or (e) commercial reasons do not support the investment or (f) anything else!  Client then says fees are not payable because the contract either was never signed or because the architect had failed to perform;  architect discovers that copyright may be unenforceable because the contract was not signed;  architect discovers that the interest provisions on unpaid fees may also be voided.
  • A “novel” design feature fails.  Architect digs out several emails to prove that the client was fully aware of the risks and chose to proceed with the design feature.  Client digs out just as many (and perhaps some of the same) emails to prove that they were “talked into” the design feature by the architect.  It is unclear who actually made the decision and on what grounds, but the client’s view prevails on the basis that they relied on the architect’s advice, and the architect had the professional duty to make prudent design decisions.
  • In housing work, the maximum stress level is reached when the construction is almost complete, the client can only see the defects and uncompleted work;  they are stressed out by the endless decisions and costs;  the builder is already overdue and being pressured to start the next project:  the dream is now reality and it may not be perfect.
  • Be aware that if you “recommend” a builder, the client may think they can hold you responsible for their performance.
  • If you elevate your concept of priorities over those of your client, there is a risk it may backfire.  Examples:  The design featured the architect’s selection of views, but when the clients went on site during construction they discovered that their requirement for expansive views had been ignored.  Another where the architect “expanded” the client’s design brief (and budget) to include work not asked for.  Many cases where the architect’s idea of aesthetics has not matched the client’s availability of money

Information

Exceeding building height:

  1. Can be especially contentious in domestic circumstances where neighbours may be concerned about the effects of new work on their sun/views/values.
  • House alteration designed to maximum height envelope:  existing construction required the overall height to be slightly raised above expectations.  Neighbour complained, and the framing had to be removed and the new top floor redesigned.
  • Misunderstanding about the position of the boundary, and therefore the height control planes:  was the actual boundary at the bottom or the top of a change in level or retaining wall near the boundary?  A similar case where there was a misunderstanding about the boundaries in relation to an adjacent accessway:  which side of the accessway generated the height planes?
  • Commercial premises designed to the maximum envelope but the height controls were then exceeded by services installations designed by others.

Site Services

  • Development of residential rear site required drainage to be run through the neighbour’s property.  Client on good terms with the neighbour and instructed the design to proceed.  Neighbour later refused to give consent, and the client claimed on the architect (and refused fee payment) on the basis that the project had to be abandoned. 
  • Building project required piles in vicinity of known subgrade services.  Services plotted and test bores sunk.  Despite best endeavours the piles or test bores unexpectedly encountered the services either not where they were understood to be, and/or whose existence was unknown.  Examples include:  shutting down an area of city electrical supply;  filling a substantial sewer with pumped concrete;  puncturing a water main;  breaking up a major stormwater pipe;  structural redesign to bridge over services or reposition bearing structure. 

Site levels/boundaries/covenants

  • No clear datum for floor levels shown on the drawings, but lid levels of manholes and sumps shown.  House slab level clearly shown, and adjacent retaining walls were dimensioned but the level at their base was not.  Builder built the retaining walls to required dimension and then set out the house from the derived height:  house floor 250mm too high.
  • Rural house designed to specific slab level and submitted for building consent.  Council required increased slab level approx. 300mm above surface water flow path.  House framed up to roof level and council pre-clad inspector noted that the builder had set out the slab level from priced drawings instead of the consented drawings. 
  • Site is subject to both local body setbacks and covenants recorded on the title or terms of sale.  Examples:  Architect assumes (or decides) that one or other of the controls either supercedes the other or is not required to be complied with:  this results in a major redesign and damages paid to affected parties.  Others where the architect advised the clients to gain the approval of neighbours but proceeded without confirming that the necessary approvals had been given and recorded in writing.

Performance

Engineering consultants

  1. Confusion about who is to detail/specify foundation waterproofing or grades versus floor levels. 
  2. Engineers being overly specific about scope of work, leaving gaps (in observation particularly) that the architect is not aware of.  Example – termination of foundation tanking at ground level not protected or perhaps allows water to enter behind it.
  3. Survey/geotech input which does not go far enough out from the immediate area of work.  Examples:  survey stopped at boundary, so the architect was unaware that the overland flow path was restricted = bottom floor of house built in a puddle;  another where engineered fill under a house washed out because of flowing subsurface water.
  4. Conversely/similarly, engineer is required to observe as part of BC requirements, but architect is not:  engineer fails to spot/report architectural issues which might appear self-evident, and architect gets lumbered with the outcome.  Example:  foundations boxed up and reinforcing placed and inspected by the engineer, but an error in the setout in relation to an existing building or boundaries is not picked up and is blamed on the architect’s drawings.
  5. Structural detailing (or approval of shop drawings) which requires a change to the architectural detailing, or which compromises acoustic design or vapour barriers, or creates thermal bridging, but which is not made apparent to the architect.
  6. Services engineers – typically works not performing to required standard, or corrosion problems – swimming pools especially!
  7. Late delivery/changes of structural work which then requires downstream alteration of other design work.
  8. Errors in calculations of lintel deflection, cantilevered slabs, wind loads, capacity of existing structural work to carry proposed new work.

Tolerances and detailing

  1. Inadequate allowance for lintel deflection in the pursuit of minimal detailing:  large sliding windows couldn’t.
  2. Joinery using solid timber sections as panelling did not sufficiently accommodate timber shrinkage/warp/movement.  (Similarly, veneered MDF joinery panels with one “feature” side and another thinner laminate on the reverse which warped accordingly).
  3. Concrete structural items designed on the assumption that specified cement or reinforcing would be used, or end-seating as designed would be provided;  failure occurred because there was insufficient on-site monitoring and/or inferior products were substituted by the contractor.
  4. Technical issues with special places or spaces that require special attention:  Indoor pools and gyms;  coastal or geothermal environments;  localised wind or weather conditions;  animal accommodation;  laboratory pressure differentials;  acoustic separation or isolation;  wet area tiling and associated balustrade installations;  inbuilt fireplaces;  concealed gutters and low-pitch roofs;  materials or details which require secondary protection;  exposed polished concrete floors;  concealed spaces subject to potential condensation or cold bridging;  remediation/recladding or leaky buildings;  flooring slip hazards,  plus many more!!!!

Money

Cost estimation    

  • House client instructs design work to proceed on the basis of a prospective contractor’s guesstimate based on concept drawings.  Final design costs considerably more and the previous contractor refuses to become involved:  architect accused of embellishing the work and adding costs.
  • Very expensive house;  client expands the budget significantly, but the cost of the final design as tendered is still well above that:  client abandons the project and seeks refund of architect’s fees as well as other abortive costs.
  • Client for 4 or 5 townhouses pushed the development options and cost-savings to the extreme and eventually could not achieve what they sought, at which time they lodged a claim in NZRAB as a prelude to a civil claim on the basis that they lost money and potential development profit. 

Certification & payments

  • Client maxes out the funding approvals, and the funders require a fixed cost price without contingencies.  Site or existing building throws up issues which are clearly a contingency item:  cost cutting must be applied elsewhere to free up the necessary funds.  Examples:  On opening up the ceiling in alteration works it is discovered that services and/or structure is unexpectedly present/absent/failed/redundant.  Another where the contractor’s tender was based on using a mobile crane but unforeseen circumstances made that impossible, and extra cost was incurred because a tower crane had to be used.  

Client refuses to accept Variations. 

  • Examples:  Retaining structures requiring to be “beefed up” and/or extended in scope to deal with ground conditions which only became known when excavation done.  Others where the architect has had second thoughts about a better design during the course of construction, and the contractor provides minimal credit for deleted work and maximum cost for the new design. 

The death spiral of Slow Payers: 

  • The client thinks the contractor has overcharged;  the contractor cannot fully pay his subbies;  the subbies prefer to work on other sites where they are getting properly paid;  there are resulting problems in co-ordinating work on site;  the contract period stretches out;  the client thinks the contractor might abandon the site or become insolvent, and with-holds payment as leverage to get the work done (or to retain funds for it to be done by others).  The architect (if doing observation and contract administration) loses hair and sleep trying to get the project back on track, and the client holds the architect responsible for the contractor’s work – or lack of it, whilst the contractor thinks the architect has been biased in under-certifying payments due.  If the architect is not involved in the construction phase, then the client and contractor will both take the position that the drawings and specification were inadequate and the cause of all these problems.  When the client consults their lawyers, the death spiral has firmly taken hold, and the prospect of an amicable resolution fades.

Cyber Cover

Cyber Cover

In the last renewal – November 2021 – some smaller practices were having difficulty in meeting the criteria for cyber cover because they were not undertaking the appropriate security processes in their systems.  Covid, and the increase in working from home, has provided increased scope for opportunistic cyber-crime, and Aon has an Australian U-Tube clip which makes useful viewing (if you can cope with the background music!):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjDT1UOPTwQ&t=3s

In reviewing your own systems, the following questions cropped and copied from the last PI renewal form may suggest actions to think about:

  • Are all computer systems, mobile devices and websites firewalled or have intrusion prevention systems on them?
  • How often are protections and procedures updated?      Daily ? – Weekly ?

Does the Practice or Entity:

  • Use firewalls to prevent unauthorised access connections from external networks and computers systems to internal networks?
  • Use anti-virus protection and procedures on all desktops, e-mail systems and mission critical servers to protect against viruses, worms, spyware and other malware?
  • Have physical security controls in place to prohibit and detect unauthorised access to their computer system and data centre?
  • Have access controls in place (e.g. passwords) for employees and other users to deny access to sensitive data on computer systems
  • Have backup and recovery procedures for all data and IT systems
  • Have any domiciled operations or derive revenue from USA, Canada, UK, Europe or Australia?

Has the Practice or Entity sustained a single loss or losses, or suffered from any cyber breaches (including, but not limited to data loss, network intrusion or hack attack including telephone hacking), or been subjected to any fines in the last three years, for which this proposed insurance may be relevant?

Collecting Fees from Reluctant Clients

Collecting Fees from Reluctant Clients

Prevention is often the best medicine for many things in life, and this includes collecting fees from reluctant clients.  It is far more efficient (and less stressful) to put systems in place that encourage timely payment of fees than it is to constantly chase clients for late payment. 

Here are some ideas to consider when reviewing your approach to invoicing and collecting fees:

Communication:  

Be clear about your payment terms at the time of engagement.  Don’t be afraid to discuss these at your initial client meeting and make sure your invoicing and payment terms are stated upfront in your Offer of Service.  Ensure you have a signed contract in place (preferably a standard NZIA AAS) that outlines conditions relating to payment of fees, suspension of services and management of disputes.

Transparency:  

Most people want to understand where their money is going, particularly when large sums are involved.  It’s helpful if invoices have a breakdown of the services or tasks provided.  Consider how you can align your Offer of Service, the contract, and the structure of your invoices so that clients have a better understanding of the services they are being provided and what they are being charged for with each invoice.

Frequency:  

Whilst traditionally architects charged by stage, invoicing on a regular basis (e.g. monthly) has a number of benefits:

  • It’s better for your cashflow.  Regular payments are the lifeblood of your business helping you to keep on top of your own regular payments (salaries, rent, licenses, etc.)
  • It’s better for your client’s cashflow.  No one likes a surprise large bill.  Smaller, regular payments are typically easier to digest for most clients.  Developing a regular pattern of invoicing also sets some expectation about payment of your fees.
  • If a client is unhappy with an invoice or with work carried out, your exposure is more limited if the bill covers a shorter period of time (e.g. a month as opposed to the entire detailed design phase!)

Managing Expectations: 

Almost inevitably, the fees set at the outset of a project will change as the project changes, and/or there will be a mis-match of perceived progress versus fees invoiced:

  • In compiling the initial fee proposal, take at least as much effort (if not more) to explain what is NOT included as what is included.  Alert your client to the prospect of fees for other consultants and regulatory approvals.
  • Educate your client about the reasons fees may change, before they change.  Where the project scope or timeline changes, alert your client to the potential fee implications.
  • Put the effort into explaining the scope of work, progress achieved, resources expended and any other verification required to indicate to the client that each fee invoice is appropriate to the work done (ie the fees are a reflection of “value” provided).  This is particularly important where the work varies from the initial fee agreement.
  • Maintain ongoing communication between fee invoices, with regular client updates to discuss the project and to demonstrate the work that the work is proceeding as expected, or if not, why not.

Suggestions for recovering late fees:

  • Send a reminder:   A gentle reminder with the accompanying invoice or statement of account is often sufficient to induce payment from a client who has forgotten to pay the bill.
  • Pick up the phone:   Good communication will resolve many issues in the practice of architecture and a friendly phone call is often the best way to get to the bottom of why a client has not paid your account.  The reasons could range from dissatisfaction with the services provided to more personal reasons (such as cashflow) on their side.  Use your problem solving skills to reach a solution that is acceptable to both parties.
  • Escalate to formal action:  It’s business, not personal:  maintain your objectivity.  Before escalation, swap positions:  put yourself in your client’s shoes and bear in mind that what for you is “business as usual”, for them may be a stressful strange and uncertain process with real tax-paid dollars at stake.  Or perhaps they are hardened commercial bargainers who routinely put pressure on all whom they deal with.  They may have misunderstood something, or may have genuine gripe which you have yet to accept, or they may just be generally nasty.  Whichever the case, don’t do anything until you can understand their side, and your potential worst case outcome.  Consider the value of your fees in arrears against your likely time costs and stress of recovering them.  Consider whether pressure applied will be returned with a vengeance.  Then – perhaps – convert those assessments to a (generous) discount on the fee applicable only if paid by a date certain.  Failing that:
  • The General Conditions of NZIA AAS map out a clear process for disputes resolution and this covers fees too (Clauses D7 and D12).
  • Any payment claims under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 can use the dispute provisions under the Act.
  • The Disputes Tribunal (Small Claims Court) can be used to settle small claims up to $30,000.  It’s a good idea to seek legal advice first to provide guidance on the outcome you might expect and how best to present your claim.
  • To escalate a debt recovery issue further, you should consult a lawyer experienced in debt recovery to discuss options.

In summary

Put systems in place to encourage timely payment of fees.  These will include:

  • clear payment terms in your Offer of Service and contract
  • structured invoices that detail a breakdown of services and fees
  • invoicing on a regular basis
  • ongoing communication

When payments are late:

  • follow up with a reminder once an account is overdue
  • call your client and keep the dialogue friendly and professional
  • be prepared to “do a deal”
  • understand your options for taking formal action and consider the likely outcome, time, costs and stress involved.

Further reading

On managing debtors, refer to the  NZIA Practice Note PN 3.212 Getting Paid:  Managing your Debtors and Reducing Financial Risk.

There are several relevant articles on the NZACS website, in particular:

Get your fees and scope agreement agreed and signed

A Sad Tale about Fees

Outstanding Fees:  Will a Fee Claim Dispute Lead to a Negligence Claim?

Fee recovery – a real-life example

Over the past 18 months or so, the Editor decided to test the actual process of fee recovery, as a learning process:  certainly not as an economic exercise!  All figures are “rounded”.

Background

The original fee was $3900.  There was no doubt or quibble about the services delivered, or potential for a counter-claim:  the client (a company) was just a classic non-payer, and refused to “engage”, presumably reckoning that there was no prospect that recovery action could be economically justified.  Whilst I could have written it off, I was not inclined to do so!

When my fee claim was not paid after several emails and promises, I served a CCA Payment Claim for that sum plus the contract rate of interest to that date.  There was no response, so I compiled a Summary Judgement application from the helpful information and templates on the Justice Dept website, seeking judgement on the original sum, plus interest, plus the lodgement/uplift costs of $450.  The client did nothing in response, and after I appeared in Court a few months later and the client failed to respond, I got my judgement, now at $4900.  But that is the easy bit:  you still have to get the money!

I then instructed a lawyer who assured me all his costs would be met from the recovery from my client:  no recovery = no legal fees.  This took another few months, filing fees of $540, and miscellaneous disbursements of about $200 which I paid out in the hope of recovery.  My client hedged and dodged, but the lawyer was ruthless (presumably to get his $2400 fees!), I waived some of the accumulated interest, and the client paid up – now $8200 – the day before being put into liquidation.

Lessons learnt:

My (unpaid) time for all this was about 15 hours, and if I had been realistic, or stressed about the issues, that would be significant in assessing whether it was all worth the effort.

The contract rate of interest is the leverage you have for recovery, but there have been legal cases which have decided that interest could not be applied because the client’s specific attention was not drawn to it at the outset.

The usual response to an assertive fee recovery is for the client to counter-claim damages for your alleged failings:  if this is even remotely possible, you must tread very carefully!  NZACS has had plenty of claims where architects have commenced Summary Judgement proceedings with the belief that it will be a sure bet for fee recovery, only to have the debtor respond with a counter-claim.  In such instances, the claim will be declined judicially.

Generally speaking, it is better to seek legal advice before seeking a Summary Judgement, and if you do enter into negotiations with the debtor, try to maintain some “wriggle room” instead of locking yourself into a course of action you may later regret.

BIM Risks

Some members have expressed an interest in understanding the risks associated with BIM – Building Information Modelling.  I don’t claim any particular BIM expertise but the following is drawn from my personal experience on medium to large commercial projects, and is therefore by no means exhaustive.

Before having anything to do with BIM, members should acquaint themselves with the New Zealand BIM Handbook https://www.biminnz.co.nz/nz-bim-handbook and its appendices.

These are very useful documents and contain more detail than the NZCIC guidelines.  More detailed information is also in the international standard ISO 19650.  These documents are a reminder that BIM is much more than a fancy parametric CAD model, and that during the life of a project there are many ways in which ‘information’ might be used.

One of the key aspects of BIM is that the work you do is generally used by and relied upon by numerous downstream parties (e.g. construction, operation) so it’s very important that what you input into a BIM model is correct and so, before you even start, you need good internal modelling standards, templates, and systems.  Also make any limitations about the model/information clear.  A good BIM model is much more valuable than a simple set of drawings and so you should charge appropriately for this.

There are various views of how you can protect your intellectual property rights but, assuming the use of an NZIA AAS, the licence to use the model is similar to the drawings and belongs to them.  The IP also lies in how you model things and carry out Quality Assurance but this will largely remain within your team and not be passed on.

As the lead consultant the architect is often also looked upon to provide BIM Management Services.  Only provide these if you are confident that you have, and can maintain, this skillset.

The following identifies some of the hazard and risk areas by typical workstage.

Project Establishment/Briefing

Request for Proposal (RFP)

  • Dealing with poorly written RFPs.  These can contain broad requirements like ‘a clash-free BIM model is to be provided to the contractor as part of the construction documentation’ or a have requirement to provide ‘a complete as-built BIM model to LOD 300’.  These can be very onerous or impractical, and to manage this risk it is important to review the RFP documents looking for these requirements, seek clarification if possible, and respond clearly with what your proposal includes.
  • If you are part of a consultant team bid then it’s worth doing a pre-contract BIM Execution Plan (BEP) so that everyone knows what they’re committing to and what is covered by the fee.  BIM is typically highly collaborative and such a BEP clearly sets out what everyone is expected to deliver.  This minimizes the risk of disagreements later and, if included in your bid, can make it clear what is in scope.
  • Make sure that you identify and charge accordingly for managing the BIM process if you have that role.  This will include the BIM manager’s time but can also include project related costs like a Common Data Environment (CDE) where the BIM model is hosted, and licences for BIM collaboration and model-checking software.  This can all add up to a considerable sum.
  • Ensure that proper protocols are in place (with all participants) to manage cyber security risks, and make sure you have the appropriate Cyber Liability insurance in place in case something goes wrong.

Briefing

  • It is important to get a BIM brief that is signed off by the client.  The NZ BIM Handbook Appendix E shows an example of such a brief.  On more than one occasion we have had to assist the client with writing the brief.  Confirm that the client understands what they are getting and that you can deliver it.  Getting an agreed brief reduces the risk of the client coming back later with additional information requirements.

Design Stages

The primary risks for this stage of the project are those associated with inefficiencies, poor coordination, and tension with your consultants.

Working with a consultant team during the design stages

  • The foundation for a good consultant team producing good BIM is a well-executed and monitored BEP which is led by the BIM Manager.
  • The BEP makes it clear what is required at each workstage and where responsibility sits, so take the time to properly review and input into this document, and ensure it is agreed upon by all parties as soon as possible.
  • It is important for future users that the project uses OpenBIM (i.e. a non-proprietary format).  Revit is quite dominant with consultants, but ArchiCAD is popular with architects so ensure that consultants are committed to exchanging models in an open formation like IFC (International Foundation Class) rather than their preferred CAD programme.
  • Make sure that your hardware can deal with the large file sizes that you will end up with.  For example, curved pipes and ducts can make these very large.
  • Carry out testing prior to the actual execution of exchanges and clash detection.

The Design Process

  • To have a decent BIM model you should have an internal model-coordinator on your team.  This is different to the BIM manager, which should be regarded as an independent role, even if you are providing those services.
  • Focus on clashes that are appropriate to the workstage.  For example large clashes are important to resolve at early design stages but don’t sweat the small stuff as this will be very time consuming.
  • Be careful of letting the ‘CAD people’ be the only team members engaged in the process.  A successful BIM project needs buy-in from all disciplines and levels, and good transparency to avoid silos developing.

Procurement

The main risks with this project stage are getting tenders/prices that don’t properly take account of the contractor’s BIM responsibilities, and have the potential to generate later claims.

It is very important that tenderers for the construction are aware of the following:

  • The status of the model that they will be provided with, including the level of development of the various BIM Model components.
  • Any limitations or qualifications about the model being provided.
  • What the contractor will be required to do with the model and who will do this work. For example, who will be responsible for updating the model as a result of variations or shop drawings, and what LOD will be required?
  • How will shop drawings be reviewed – drawings only or models only or both?
  • Are as-builts required and what is the level of accuracy of these?
  • Is any BIM reporting needed during the construction phase?

Tenderers should be required to submit a construction BEP to confirm that they properly understand and have included for all BIM aspects.

Construction/Handover/Operation

  • Responsibility during the construction stage will rest largely with the main contractor and sub-contractors.  There may be some risk to the architect if they have a role of updating the model and do this poorly.
  • Like non-BIM projects there is also the obvious risk of variation claims arising from poorly executed design, coordination and documentation in the earlier stages.
  • To enable a smooth handover from contractor to client/user, the defects liability period can be used for a ‘soft landing’.  The BIM Manager is likely to have a role in monitoring this.
  • There are likely to be fewer risks to the design team members during the building operation stage but it’s important to ensure that the client has the necessary skills and software to make proper use of the BIM model.  This will reduce the risk of an operational failure and any possible resultant claim.

Summary

The best way to mitigate BIM risks is the usual combination of good communication, thoroughness, and quality assurance.

You need to think carefully about the fees necessary to do it properly.

Risk management issues

  • The BIM model is dependent on multiple contributors and will be relied upon by others for future unknown decisions.  How do you confine your liability to your input only?  This is likely to require specific terms of engagement. 
  • If an “issue” arises out of the use of the BIM model, there is the potential that you may incur costs and resources regardless of the relevance of your contribution to it.  How do you “ring-fence” or allocate the respective inputs by the various contributors or users?
  • If there is some ambiguity or conflict between the BIM model and the other responsibilities you have under your engagement – or have described in your design/specification – which takes precedence?
  • The definition of quality standards may require amendments to address the standardisation of BIM guidelines.
  • Is there a “BIM protocol” which specifically deals liability and responsibility, order of precedence, and the resolution of conflict?
  • There need to be protocols to trace work carried out in BIM and establish what occurred, who did what to whom and when, and to establish causation in the event a dispute arises.
  • What are the intellectual property rights and ownership issues?  Who “owns” the BIM model and controls access and use?  To what extent does it affect your copyright on design elements?
  • Check that your professional indemnity insurance covers failures due to BIM design, and what additional provisions you may need to make.  Your duty to disclose material facts to your insurer may require you to disclose that BIM is implemented on a project.
  • The operation of BIM on a project may inadvertently allow parties to access information which is otherwise confidential.  Parties may consider restricting access to different areas of BIM.

List of All Articles

List of All Articles

Articles will be listed as they are published in Communique, or as Seminar papers. The list is not hyperlinked to the articles. Many articles appear under multiple categories, only the primary category is shown here. Category = “All” will pick up all articles.

Date loadedArticle TitleCategories
16-Nov-2100 Current List of All Articles by Category then by TitleAll
01-Aug-18Consultant Selection Best PracticeConsultants; 
01-Aug-18Employees, freelancers, contractorsConsultants; 
03-Aug-23Reliance on, and co-ordination of trade and consultant adviceConsultants; 
01-Aug-18Estimates and budgetsCost Control
01-Aug-18Project BudgetsCost Control
15-Feb-21Project Cost Management – Not Snakes and LaddersCost Control
01-Aug-18Who is responsible for the budgetCost Control
15-Feb-21A Flaming Row:  signing off on specialist design inputDesign Management; 
17-Feb-21ACP PanelsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Alteration projectsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Asbestos Cement Materials (ACM)Design Management; 
15-Sep-21Balustrades and BarriersDesign Management; 
03-Aug-23Balustrades and BarriersDesign Management; 
03-Aug-23BIM –  Legal and Engagement ConsiderationsDesign Management; 
03-Aug-23BIM – Project Risk ManagementDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18But can they be TrustedDesign Management; 
17-Feb-21CAD file transfersDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Claims involving ConsultantsDesign Management; 
01-Feb-20Cross-leases covenants and planning controlsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Design of WHRS remediation works.Design Management; 
01-Aug-18Documentation failuresDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Drone risks and requirementsDesign Management; 
03-Aug-23Engineered Stone RisksDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Fire Code changesDesign Management; 
17-Feb-21Fit for Purpose StatementsDesign Management; 
01-Sep-19Land Covenants, Unit Title restrictions and Cross Lease restrictionsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Land Ownership RightsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18NZBC E3Design Management; 
17-Feb-21NZS 3604, Lintels and importance levelsDesign Management; 
17-Feb-21Passive Fire Design  – Intumescent paint systemsDesign Management; 
15-Feb-21Passive Fire Design – Problems, Risks, ReferencesDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Peer reviewsDesign Management; 
03-Aug-23Pre-design site informationDesign Management; 
17-Feb-21Proprietary SystemsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Risk Management and Environmental IssuesDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Site dimensioning problemsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Skillion roofsDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Stainless SteelDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Understanding design obligations – The Contractor’s DutiesDesign Management; 
01-Aug-18Arbitration & Adjudication – Consumer protection provisionsDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Building Act – Responsibilities of the partiesDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Can a contractor (or subcontractor) make a claim against an architect?Dispute Management; 
03-Aug-23Causes of ClaimsDispute Management; 
03-Aug-23Collecting Fees from Reluctant ClientsDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Complaints to NZRAB or BPBDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Confidentiality in settlementsDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Construction Contracts ActDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Construction Contracts Act Amendment: incorporation of designersDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Consumer Guarantees ActDispute Management; 
01-Nov-19Expert WitnessesDispute Management; 
15-Feb-21How long to keep recordsDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Joint and several liabilityDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Liability for Company DirectorsDispute Management; 
03-Aug-23NZRAB Disciplinary costsDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18Preparing for disputesDispute Management; 
01-Aug-18The Role of the Expert WitnessDispute Management; 
15-Feb-21What does it say – What does it meanDispute Management; 
03-Aug-23Do agreements for engagement need to be in writingEngagement & Fees; 
03-Aug-23Pro-bono work and PJsEngagement & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Changes to the Scope of ServicesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21Communication and the client experienceEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21Communications – Put it in writingEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Completion CertificatesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Conditions of Engagement:  are they Mandatory?Engagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21Copyright in ArchitectureEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21Engagement Terms – sign before designEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
15-Feb-21Get your fees and scope agreement agreed and signedEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Hold Harmless ClausesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Limited Services – Minimizing the riskEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21Non-standard terms of engagement (1)Engagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21Non-standard terms of engagement (2)Engagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18NZACS Guide to Better Agreements for ServicesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18On selling the project and selling out on the architectEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Partial servicesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18Recent NZRAB Ethics changesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Sep-19The Continuing Saga of Client-Imposed Agreements for Services Engagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18When an Owner Wants a WarrantEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
17-Feb-21When contract terms shift the risks and responsibilitiesEngagement, Clients & Fees; 
01-Aug-18A Background to Insurance Insurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Budgeting for ExcessInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Common Insurance and Contractual TermsInsurance concepts & scope; 
23-Sep-22Cyber CoverInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Cyber LiabilityInsurance concepts & scope; 
15-Feb-21Cyber Liability & Cyber RisksInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Design/Build SituationsInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Do I need Public Liability CoverInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Home replacement insurance valuationsInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Levels of PI CoverInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18No Claim for No Claims BonusInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18NZACS discretionary benefitInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Runoff cover – requires updatingInsurance concepts & scope; 
15-Feb-21Selecting Professional Indemnity CoverInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Steigrad – the caseInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Which PI Policy should I take outInsurance concepts & scope; 
01-Aug-18Who is the InsuredInsurance concepts & scope; 
03-Aug-23Cyber Cover – matters for firms to reviewInsurance concepts and scope; 
03-Aug-23Should I NotifyInsurance concepts and scope; 
03-Aug-23The risks in being self-insuredInsurance concepts and scope; 
03-Aug-23What can influence the cost of insuranceInsurance concepts and scope; 
03-Aug-23What do you do when a client asks for your insurance certificateInsurance concepts and scope; 
03-Aug-23What level of cover should we carryInsurance concepts and scope; 
01-Nov-19Liaison with Government & Consultant GroupsNZACS History & Purpose
03-Aug-23NZACS – A Short History 1972 to 2022NZACS History & Purpose
22-Sep-22NZACS: 50 Years YoungNZACS History & Purpose
01-Aug-18Practice structures and family trustsPractice Administration; 
15-Feb-21Practice SurvivalPractice Administration; 
15-Feb-21Private JobsPractice Administration; 
15-Feb-21Slowing down?  An action list for Smaller FirmsPractice Administration; 
01-Aug-18Builders deposit before starting workProcurement & Contracts; 
17-Feb-21Completion StatementsProcurement & Contracts; 
03-Aug-23Contract Administration versus Contract ManagementProcurement & Contracts; 
03-Aug-23Covid or Supply-Chain Costs and DelaysProcurement & Contracts; 
15-Feb-21Covid19: project impactsProcurement & Contracts; 
01-Aug-18GuaranteesProcurement & Contracts; 
16-Nov-21ObservationProcurement & Contracts; 
03-Aug-23ObservationProcurement & Contracts; 
01-Aug-18Practical Completion CertificatesProcurement & Contracts; 
01-Aug-18Responding to Payment ClaimsProcurement & Contracts; 
01-Aug-18(Un)Proportional LiabilityRisk & Liability; 
03-Aug-23Certification of completionRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Claim StatisticsRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Claims are StressfulRisk & Liability; 
03-Aug-23Climate change and Natural DisastersRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Disputes and duties in Contract and in Tort arising out of Contract Administration.Risk & Liability; 
03-Aug-23Does the 10 year longstop still applyRisk & Liability; 
15-Sep-21Does the 10 year longstop still apply?Risk & Liability; 
17-Feb-21Free adviceRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18LBPs and RBWRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Leaky Buildings a retrospectiveRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Limitation (time) versus LiabilityRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Managing Risk 1- The Basics of Risk ManagementRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Managing Risk 2 -Identifying Risk within the FirmRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Managing Risk 3 – Identifying Risk External to the FirmRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Managing Risk 4 – Assessing and Quantifying RiskRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Managing Risk 5 – Allocating, Transferring and Mitigating RiskRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Managing Risk 6 – Interactive ChecklistRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Multiple Housing UnitsRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Notifiable situationsRisk & Liability; 
15-Sep-21NZRAB Disciplinary costsRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Problem clientsRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Project Initiation – a Good Kick-offRisk & Liability; 
15-Feb-21Reliance on, and co-ordination of trade and consultant adviceRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18The Cost of InnocenceRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18The Uninsured Cost of Professional Negligence AllegationsRisk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Why Claims Happen 1Risk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Why Claims Happen 2Risk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Why Claims Happen 3Risk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Why Claims Happen 4Risk & Liability; 
01-Aug-18Will a fee claim dispute lead to a negligence claimRisk & Liability; 
15-Sep-21A Grim Tale About Piggies and WolvesTales of Woe
03-Aug-23A Grim Tale About Piggies and WolvesTales of Woe
15-Feb-21A Sad Tale about FeesTales of Woe
01-Aug-18Tales of woe – Budgets and EstimatesTales of Woe
01-Aug-18Tales of woe – colours and selectionsTales of Woe
03-Aug-23Tales of Woe – Site informationTales of Woe
03-Aug-23Tales of Woe – Site survey mattersTales of Woe
03-Aug-23Tales of Woe – the perils of admitting liabilityTales of Woe
03-Aug-23Tales of Woe – Variations, warranties, costs, and deflectionsTales of Woe