Forum Architectural Services vs. Flats East Bank
The original design of this project featured a very elaborate exterior curtainwall for the tower that was unaffordable for the developer. The original architect was uncooperative. The developer retained a second architect to simply the project’s design and create Design Development documents that the developer could utilize to secure a maximum not-to-exceed price in a short period of time.
The second architect began to work and began submitteing extremely high invoices to the client monthly which the client paid. The invoices had no detail and bore to resemblane to the scope of work being performed. The second architect fell far behind and never produced the documents that were sufficiently complete to secure pricing. The developer stopped paying the invoices which were wildly excessive. The second archtect sued.
We evaluated the work, the invoices, time sheets. We developed four different analyses to determine appropriate fee for the second architect. All four methods indicated that the second architect had invoiced the client more than four times the value of the work performed.