Chapter 9
We had great difficulty in describing the relationship of the design professional
and his client in Section 9.2. It is not a full–fledged fiduciary relationship, nor one
at arm’s length, where each party must look out only for itself. It is in between.
Much depends on the issue and the facts. Maybe in the end it is a matter of good
faith and fair dealing. The Petra case extends this discussion to the relationship
Section 9.3 is a dense and complicated section. It provides the opportunity to
explore the business (rather then legal) side of architecture or engineering. Many
compensation methods can be used—what impact does each choice have on the
relationship with the client?
The dominance of AIA contracts makes Section 9.3B worthy of attention. Why
is percentage of cost being used less? Why did the AIA downgrade multiples of
cost? These issues are tied to the issue of basic versus additional costs. It is vital
1.) According to Article 3 of the AIA B101–2007 Document, what are the five
components of architectural services?
2.) How should funds that are held by the design professional that belong to the client
be handled?
3.) In the instructions to the B101-2007 Document, what are the four methods to
compute compensation for architectural services that are based on cost and time?
4.) According to the EJCDC Document E–500, Exhibit A, how many optional additional
services that require the owner’s written authorization and how many required
additional services not requiring owner’s written authorization are listed?