Considering all the other mistakes he made, I wouldn't want to take the chance of using the plans he came up with. Something he did will probably result in your house burning down or something. Really, your best bet is to start over with a new (qualified) architect.

I feel for you but would still like to here his side of the story.I used to wok on a lot of historical restoration projects for the state,which is not your situation but there are a lot of issues that the typical HO does not understand or ever deal with.Hope it works out for you.

It appears that you contracted for professional services and received somewhat less than what you contracted for. I believe it's reasonable to expect a licensed architect would incur the cost to redesign the plans to comply with all applicable codes and ordinances in your area. Compliance with codes and ordinances should have been performance criteria in your contract for design services.

If your architect is unable or unwilling to revise the plans at no cost to you, I encourage you to file a complaint with the professional licensing board for architects in your state. You are entitled to professional services when you contract for them.

For the record, this comment comes from a builder--the lot of which architects suggest you need protection from. Go get 'em!

There are always two sides to a story, but I'm not sure what our architect's excuse is for messing up the setbacks and making other rookie mistakes. He apparently thought the city restrictions were unclear. If he didn't understand them why wouldn't he have called the city or investigated them further? I'm not a design professional, but I feel like he absolutely fouled up here by not interpreting them properly and am really upset he's holding the plans hostage, forcing us to pay a lot more $$ to have someone start the design process over and delaying our project by months. We will be filing a complaint with our state licensing board and am considering contacting the AIA to file a grievance as well.

I would have a discussion with the architect. Basically you paid him good money to make these plans which have been nothing but failures. He should be willing to give you what has been made so far because you have paid for it. If not, expect to go to court and have bad reviews made about him. When it comes down to it, you have paid for those plans and they belong to you at this point. You prefer someone else make modifications from here on, but the plans belong to you as you have paid for them. I am all for giving people the benefit of the doubt but that many mess ups and your done!

vithdude, while I agree a conversation is a good place to start and attempting to work something out amicably would be the preferred way to go. And I not sticking up for the architect but the op stated that "The contract states that the CAD/electronic versions of the drawings are his property". So technically she does not own the plans, has the right to use them but does not own them.

Wow, I'm sorry op. I'm only adding sympathy here, you are out a ton of money with nothing to show for it. I would definitely be airing my grievances with this guy all over town. Maybe you can prevent some other homeowner from losing thousands of dollars.

Sometimes a clear letter explaining your grievances and offering to "settle your claims" for performance of certain tasks and/or certain payments can resolve these sorts of professional disputes. I'd spend a couple hours drafting a clear letter to the architect outlining your complaints and how he failed to meet your expectations, breached your contract, and failed his professional duty in ways x, y, and z. Then make specific requests of the action(s) you require of him. Then offer that "At this time, if, by Date (10 days from now), you do a, b, and c, I will consider my claims against you dropped, and will not seek further compensation for those issues."

Just be sure that a, b, and c are reasonable and do-able for the architect. And allow at least 5 business days for him to do what you're asking (and consult his attorney if desired).

I've had pretty impressive results resolving some serious disputes with that method. If you write a strong, clear letter . . . the recipient gets the message loud and clear of exactly how he failed you, and that if you can give HIM that convincing a letter, you can give it to a lawyer, judge, or licensing board just as easily . . . The implied threat can be very effective.

Pretty interesting how paying someone money results in that same someone owning what you paid them for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property

I do cad designs and drawings o submit to potential customers for remodeling jobs.They are shown the drawings to see what they are paying for and to make any changes.They do not get to keep the drawings until a contract is signed.The reason for this is to keep them from using my design ,drawings and time to get bids from another contractor.Tey are welcome to get all the bids they want but not from my work.Let the other guy put his own time into his bid as I have.

I understand your situation is a bit different and I hope you get it resolved.I was just trying to explain to some of the other posters on the thread about intellectual property that did not seem to know the concept.

What you purchase when you use an architect is the right of use for the drawings. You can use the ideas expressed in the drawings to create the building, but you cannot actually lay claim to owning the instruments of service, i.e., the drawings themselves. The architect maintains ownership of those. Relinquishing the rights to those instruments of service to a client usually requires a much heftier fee be paid.

That is something that only a lawsuit can determine. He can not be forced to turn over any work to you without that. The only winners to that approach are the lawyers.

A compromise is always the most productive approach. You don't want to compromise, you will need to start over. So, do you take a VERY expensive route (sueing and paying another architect) or an expensive route (starting over with another architect) or the least expensive route (paying the additional funds to the original architect).

Don't let your pride cause you to cut off your nose to spite your face here. Cool down. And get an outside opinion from a contract lawyer before you make any decision.

Don't be surprised by the fact that it may take a year or more if you go to court for it to even be heard. A new architect very well may charge you MORE money to work with another architect's cad's as most don't want anything to do with anything another architect worked on.

We signed a contract and paid for the drawings. Regardless of what the contract says, the issue here is negligence in preparing the plans (his failure to compute the setback restrictions, failure to advise of zoning laws, etc). I think it's pretty clear he screwed up and we are entitled to, at the very least, the plans we paid for.

What the contract states is definitely important. If he is negligent and failed to provide what was contracted I can see getting a refund, but I can't see how you are going to force him to give you something (the electronic drawings) that was not part of the contract.

Your above quote from the AIA about the Instruments of Service would appear to imply the the Instruments of Service that were part of the contract.

"I do cad designs and drawings o submit to potential customers for
remodeling jobs.They are shown the drawings to see what they are paying
for and to make any changes.They do not get to keep the drawings until a
contract is signed.The reason for this is to keep them from using my
design ,drawings and time to get bids from another contractor.Tey are
welcome to get all the bids they want but not from my work.Let the other
guy put his own time into his bid as I have."

Ok, they signed a contract and paid, and now the architect wont release the plans. How can they use the plans without having them? Oh im gonna draw up your house but once you agree its good to use I am keeping the plans and your builder will need to go through me to make the house. What kind of stupid hassle that would be.

The architect is being ignorant thinking he should charge for reworking something he messed up on. Your going to have to find a way to convince him to redo it for free. I feel that there was a breach in contract because his plans were faulty. Not sure how you can use that to your advantage at this point as I don't have the contract in front of me.

dugster:

Write a letter to the AIA and the board overseeing architects explaining everything. Send him a copy first, telling him that if the issue isn't resolved amicably within a week, you will make the complaints formal.

Now he has a choice to make. I'll bet he folds.

The AIA can't recover a deleted CAD file. Neither can a lawyer. If you want that, he's in charge of the situation.

Forget the CAD file or the drawings. Start fresh. Doing anything else isn't productive for the actual job at hand. Revenge takes deep pockets and a cold outlook on life. Let it go. Concentrate on moving forward with the project with someone new.

As a homeowner, I think it is good advice to write a clear, concise letter outlining your issues. Be sure to send it return, receipt requested in the mail.

Here is something else you may consider. Ask him to release his work product to you in a spirit of cooperation, offer to pay him an additional hour of his time to provide you with a copy of his work to date. I know it will stick in your craw to give the guy another dime, but what you really want are the plans. Make it easy for him and it will impress the licensing board if it ever comes to that. Good luck.

Won't the zoning ordinance affect you, no matter your choice of architect? Seems that that is a static cost, no matter what you do. It may be a surprise, but it's obviously not a project stopper. Sure, it's disappointing to have the additional expense, but it's not going away, right?

When you say he ''miscalculated'' the setbacks, was he working off of a recent survey of your property? Who provided him with the copy of the survey? Were the setbacks different for different neighborhoods, or for a historical district? It's that way in my city. The city has their own rules, but the historic districts each have their own rules too, and it is sometimes difficult to figure out what will satisfy them all. Sometimes the ''boards'' don't really have any enforcement power, and sometimes they do. It depends entirely on the home's age, historical significance, and location within the district.

You've only been working together 4 months, and already had plans not only prepared, but actually brought before the board? That is pretty astonishingly rapid by anyone living in a historic district's standards! It took a year's worth of groveling and modifications to plans for us to be able to add a driveway to the old Foursquare that we lived in. We had to forget modifying the old carriage house on the alleyway to serve as an actual garage. They wouldn't allow the drive to be in the logical location on the property. :-|

I think you need to take some deep breaths. Take a vacation. Whatever it takes for you t get back on track. I know you wanted to get this settled and the project started and finished with. That's just not a realistic expectation when dealing with red tape first of all. Second, the more people who have says over what you can do with our house, the longer the process becomes. I'm still astonished that you were able to get your first denial within 4 months!

Perhaps a clash of personalities prevents you from going back and working with the original architect. That's fine. Move on. Really move on. Instead of thinking of ways of grinding his bones into dust, go ahead and hire that someone new. Also, consider that any relationship is a two way street, and take what you've learned from that interaction into the new relationship, and with a new set of expectations.

"The AIA can't recover a deleted CAD file. Neither can a lawyer. If you want that, he's in charge of the situation."

Sure they can, indirectly.

As a licensed Florida building contractor, I get to brag that there's never been a formal complaint filed with the state against me. If someone ever wrote me such a letter, I'm going to have to weigh whether or not capitulation is worth my bragging rights. Let him make the same choice.

More than one person has told you here that getting either the drawings or the CAD file would be useless to any new architect. Why do you insist that any responsible professional would use bad information to create new, accurate, documents? Would you take a bad spreadsheet and input more information? Take a bad diagnosis of a patient and repeat the same steps that led there?

The only reason you are insisting on obtaining that information is not to help any new professional that you hire. You want it simply because he told you you couldn't have it. Because you are angry and want to punish him.

Hurrying into creating a design document without verifying that all information provided to him was correct IS an error. People make errors. There ARE other potential reasons for errors other than ''incompetency''.

GIGO happens a lot in some cities. Dealing with various governmental and quasi governmental agencies is nightmare inducing enough in NYC that construction professionals have a specialist ''expediter'' position just to deal with all of that red tape. You CAN get conflicting information from different entities who all insist that they are right. 4 months there wouldn't be enough to even get a preliminary outline of the existing building, much less a full scope of work document with every T crossed and I dotted and verified.

4 months in Dayton without any historical district blather would be enough to design a whole house. Context matters. Location matters. Experience with the above and patience matters. An even temperament matters.

There IS another side to every story.

I se no reason to use phrases like "idiot architect" on the internet since it does neither party or the contributors to the thread any good.There are bad and good in every trade and I have no doubt that you both may have been wronged but it would be interesting to hear the architects side.

Woman called me a while back to build her a walnut bookcase.Single mom with two kids on a budget so I gave her a break on the price.The day after it was installed she called me raising hell because the case was made out of plywood.Well, it was A1 cabinet grade walnut veneer plywood for the case with solid 3/4" walnut for the rest.Well above industry standard.

Take a look at your high end end custom kitchen cabinets.Are any of them solid wood?She said the back was nothing but 1/2" paneling.It was a grade walnut veneer.The back was against the wall and 1/2" was more than sufficient.I'm sure your custom kitchens have 1/4" backs and probably of a less expensive species.

Bottom line is that she bad mouthed me every chance she could get.If I would have made the cabinets form solid walnut "which she did not ask for and was not in the contract" the materials would have cost me more than what she paid for the finished product.

Just one example of little understanding of the trades by consumers and it's always good to hear both sides.Reread the second sentence of the first paragraph.I'm with you both as long as I'm hearing the full story.

The example I gave was for a bookcase .A lot different than a house so here is a bigger project I have done that is the oldest build in the state of IL.The Rose Hotel in Elizabeth town

When building something like this or a house you are dealing with an architect who has to deal with a structural engineer,zoning board,planning commission,building inspectors in several fields and a historical committee. There are tons of revisions to the plans and everyone has to be resubmitted and approved by all of the above.

Dugster,
Move on. If this designer wasn't familiar with something as remedial as zoning rules, I would hate to see what the rest of the design is like. I understand it is going to be costly, but a comprehensive design review hasn't been done, what else will be uncovered or "overlooked" during construction. These oversights could get very expensive (improper material specs, local building codes , window & door opening match schedule).
As far as the dwgs go, I wouldn't even consider using them. There are ways of converting paper dwgs to cad files but why bother. Take the person to small claims court, you will probably recoup more there then versus using an atty. I am a design pro and have seen a lot of junk by people who have entrusted work to underlings, can't say no to a job or plain lazy.

When a top fabricator screws up, the calls for lawsuits are many and unrelenting. When an architect does, it's "get over it." Why the double standard?

There's a difference in tangibility. A physical product is so much easier for even an unskilled eye to critique, certainly for someone to lay hands on as a final result. When you are actually purchasing ideas and not a physical product, the fail is often much more difficult to quantify to a casual observer or end user. Thats ends up with much less of a chance of success in the legal arena.

Not one person has said to forget about going after the original architect for his failure. Everyone has said that the result of additional expenditure is not likely to yield a return on that expense.

''Moving on'' doesn't mean not exploring if the amount involved would be eligible for small claims, or if a complaint to the AIA (if he's even a member, many architects are not) would compel some reimbursement. Sure, check out all of those remedies, after engaging a new architect to get the project back on trrack. The main objective is the end result, and putting your energy in that direction will be the most productive.

Anyone who would sue a contractor over a counter top doesn't have A good grasp of cost vs value gained either. Unless the counter broke and killed someone, you are not going to ever have the outlay equal the time and effort that initiating the suit would take.

If an architect makes a mistake and will not voluntarily correct it for free you must either let it go or sue him. There is no other recourse. I suspect you would have had a better chance of negotiating a settlement if you had discussed it in a civil manner before firing him.

To assume that the architect has made other mistakes in the architectural drawings because he misinterpreted a zoning setback regulation seems at bit unreasonable and self-serving.

The first rule of negotiating is to not close possible paths to a beneficial settlement because of your emotions. Your reference to "architect screwed up big time" made it clear that you had an emotional approach. If you tend to react to problems in that manner it is best to let someone else deal with these issues.

I'm not quite on the same page as renovator8. I think it is reasonable to assume some inaccuracies in the plans based on the architect's failure to do the simple stuff right (i.e., zoning and set-backs.)

Folks have suggested that a designer/architect wouldn't want to start with a set of flawed plans. I concur. Our company is a residential design/build contractor with a licensed architect on staff. We would never import someone else's plan and the potential errors that could go with it.

"the architect's failure to do the simple stuff right (i.e., zoning and set-backs.)"

I hope you were being facetious.

Interpretation of zoning setback formulas can be extremely complicated and difficult to interpret especially when they are not in the same section but in other unrelated sections. No architect is trained in this work so it would be unfair to make assumptions about their architectural skills based on their zoning ordinance interpretations.

The only way to get it right is to review it with the zoning officer at the building department and I have found some who don't feel it is their job to explain the ordinance to design professionals. Short of hiring a zoning lawyer you have to submit a design to find out if it is allowed.

Here is a sample of the setback requirements in a town where I have practiced architecture for 45 years but I still have great difficulty getting the setbacks right. There are even exceptions and modifications allowed in other unrelated sections of the ordinance. Section 5.21.1 is the hidden jewel that I have seen overlooked by architects on several projects.

I challenge you to read all of the requirements below and tell me they are "simple":

(b) In a Residence B district a dwelling need not set back more than the average of the setbacks of the buildings, other than accessory buildings, on the lots adjacent thereto the on either side, but in no case may any part of a building or accessory building extend nearer to any street line, or building line if such has been stablished, than ten (10) feet. A vacant lot or a lot occupied by a building set back more than fifteen (15) feet shall be considered as though occupied by a building setback fifteen (15) feet.

(c) In a Residence C, C-1, C-2, C-2A, C-2B, C-3, or C-3A district if a building is hereafter erected on a lot adjacent to a building having a blank wall directly on the side lot line, the new building may be so designed and erected that it will be flush with that portion of the blank wall of the former building which extends along the lot line; otherwise, however, not less than the required side yard shall be provided; in any case the required side yard shall be provided for the remainder of the full lot depth. In case a side wall contains windows or in case any part of a side blank wall of an existing building shall be set back from the side lot line, then a building hereafter erected on the lot adjacent to such an existing building shall be set back from the side lot line in accordance with the provisions thereof.

5.21.1 On lots of less than the required area for the district in which they are located and which have been duly recorded by plan or deed with the Registry of Deeds before the date of the first passage of the applicable provisions of this or any prior Ordinance the minimum lot size and lot width regulations need not apply, but the floor area ratio and the minimum lot area regulations for each dwelling unit shall be applicable. In case of such lots of less than the required width the sum of the two required side yards need not be more than thirty (30) percent of the lot width, except that each side yard shall be a minimum of seven feet, six inches (7’ 6”).

5.24.4 Measurements for minimum yards which are determined by formula shall be made in the following manner:

(1) “H” is the height of the building. “L” is the length of the wall measured parallel to the corresponding lot or street line. The front yard is measured from the street line, or building line where such has been established, except where otherwise indicated herein. For buildings of forty (40) feet or less in height the denominator in the yard formulas in the Tables in Section 5.30 may be increased by two subject to the minimum yard requirements set forth in footnotes a, b and c of Tables 5-1 and 5-2.

(2) Where a building consists of various roof levels an average height, or “H”, may be used in the required yard formula. Average height is determined by adding the products of the height of each roof level facing the given lot line, (H1, H2, etc.) times the length of each roof level (L1, L2, etc.) and dividing the sum by the sum of the length of the levels (L1, L2, etc.) (see formula below)

AVERAGE HEIGHT = (H1 x L1) + (H2 x L2) / L1 + L2

(3) Where a building presents a variety of vertical planes to any given lot or street line, no plane shall be closer to the street or building line or lot line than permitted by the application to such plane of the appropriate formula in the tables of dimensional requirements in Section 5.30. For all planes set forward of the setback line required by said tables for the building if it were constructed in a single vertical plane, other planes must be set behind the setback line so calculated. The result shall be that the sum of the products of the setback required for each plane times the facing area of each plane respectively shall be at least as great as the product of the setback required by the appropriate table for the building if it were constructed in a single vertical plane times the facing area of the building if viewed as a single plane. (see illustration below):

The product of (setback1 x facing area1) + (setback2 x facing area2) MUST EQUAL OR EXCEED the product of (single plane setback) x (single plane facing area)

"Interpretation of zoning setback formulas can be extremely complicated and difficult to interpret especially when they are not in the same section but in other unrelated sections. No architect is trained in this work so it would be unfair to make assumptions about their architectural skills based on their zoning ordinance interpretations."

I think you can make some valid assumptions about his skills and experience as an architect in that he should know better that it is complicated and out of his skillset, to get the right person for that aspect of the job.

Sounds like you need a lawyer to navigate that, based on advice given to islander in a similar thread today.

I'm sorry, but I simply can't accept that zoning is on par with brain surgery, if it were, it would be in the realm of the private--not public-- sector. In my experience (I'm an licensed professional engineer, not a brain surgeon), if there are questions about zoning, a simple telephone call or e-mail to the zoning official with an identification of the specific parcel in question is all it takes to clear it up. Most survey base maps prepared by licensed surveyors will indicate the required set-backs (building envelope) on the survey base map. If the zoning ordinance was too complicated for a licensed architect to figure out, then a survey base map should have been obtained before design work commenced.

Every profession has a standard of care. In my opinion, designing a building or addition to an existing building within the allowable set-backs falls within the standard of care for a licensed architect. This client in this case paid for professional services and received something less. If they were dealing with a "professional" architect then he/she would remedy the error at no expense to the client.

Yes setbacks can be complicated, but that is what architects are paid for and they should expect it to be complicated. I would expect the architect to communicate with the zoning office to get the requirements for what applies to that lot before a plan is drawn. The last thing I would want to do as an architect is spend time making a plan that doesn't work. I understand life is not perfect and I would not have a problem with an architect reworking the plan, but I would not be thrilled to be paying for it again because he messed up and didn't do the correct groundwork/research before making the plans. The architect should be reworking it for free because he did not produce a usable plan.

"The product of (setback1 x facing area1) + (setback2 x facing area2)
MUST EQUAL OR EXCEED the product of (single plane setback) x (single
plane facing area)"

In honesty, while it is not a simple task I agree with you, its algebra. If your not happy doing math for this job then look elsewhere.
((a x b) + (c x d)) => (e x f)

I'm not saying the architect shouldn't have consulted the zoning officer or asked the owner to hire an experienced zoning lawyer. I'm saying we should not be making such casual judgements about the performance of others when we don't know the details of what was involved.

I haven't been at the Houzz forum for long but I was on the GardenWeb forum for 9 years. Too many of the posts there were for the purpose of venting anger at an architect or builder. The only advice the these posters needed was to consult a lawyer about a breach of contract matter rather than getting side-tracked in professional ethics and vindictiveness.

If we are guessing, I would guess that the OP took an adversarial approach by firing the architect and that act probably turned a simple problem into a far more complicated and expensive one. Knee-jerk responses to building problems is for those willing to suffer unnecessary emotional and financial pain and it doesn't help to add fuel to that fire.

"If an architect makes a mistake and will not voluntarily correct it for free you must either let it go or sue him. There is no other recourse."

There is other recourse and I've mentioned it previously.

As I mentioned earlier, the AIA and the state board of registration will not take sides or disciplinary action regarding a contract dispute. They are primarily concerned with people misrepresenting themselves as architects, successful lawsuits against architects for damages due to negligence, and failure to meet continuing education requirements.

If this is really an architect, it is highly likely the Owner-Architect contract calls for arbitration as the first form of dispute resolution. If that is the case and the owner did not ask for arbitration in writing before terminating the contract, then the owner may also be in breach of the contract. These matters are rarely as simple as first presented by an angry OP.

If the OP has a serious question to ask, we should first be given a more complete account of the situation and the terms of the Owner-Architect contract so we don't end up sounding like Judge Judy.

"As I mentioned earlier, the AIA and the state board of registration will not take sides or disciplinary action regarding a contract dispute."

They don't need to for the OP to have leverage as long as the complaint is public. This is the age of the internet and instant reviewing. A few well-placed posts of the complaint could be much more trouble than a refund.

That approach is naive; it could get the OP into serious trouble if discovered by the architect. Internet complaints that name a contractor or design professional are usually removed by moderators because they are a violation of the terms of service.

All state Boards of Architectural Registration are governed by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. The NCARB Ethics and Professional Rules of Conduct state: “In designing a project, an architect shall take into account all applicable state and municipal building laws and regulations. While an architect may rely on the advice of other professionals (e.g., attorneys, engineers and other qualified persons) as to the intent and meaning of such regulations, once having obtained such advice, an architect shall not knowingly design a project in violation of such laws and regulations.”

As you can see, by definition, an architect's unintentional mistake is not a violation of professional ethics or rules of conduct. A refusal to correct a mistake would simply be a contract compliance issue that would be resolved by mutual agreement, binding arbitration or a court. Every year an architect must reveal to a state registration board any successful court action against him/her for their professional conduct. This is when an architect might have his/her license suspended, revoked or be required to pay a fine.

As for "leverage" without legal action, the OP probably gave that up by prematurely terminating the contract. I suspect that a calmer, less vindictive approach might have saved the OP a great deal of trouble. A good approach would be to write to the architect and apologize for overreacting and asking for his side of the difficulty regarding the permit and his suggestion of how you might resolve it. If he responds, that might be the beginning of a settlement negotiation or you can threaten to use it against him in court. That's real leverage.

In my experience, in order to submit a design for a building permit it must be accompanied by a survey showing the location of the new work and the relevant setbacks, heights, area ratios, etc. in compliance with the zoning regulations and stamped as such by the surveyor. This makes it pretty rare to be refused a permit unless it is the intent of the owner to do so and then be able to apply for a variance.

I don't know if the municipality for this project requires a survey in order to get a permit but, if it does, the services of a surveyor are always the responsibility of an owner rather than the owner's architect.

"That approach is naive; it could get the OP into serious trouble if discovered by the architect."

Renovator8:

If you reread my post, I suggested typing a letter of complaint that would be made public if relief isn't forthcoming. Bluffing isn't against the law.

All is not lost for this architect. I wrote a column last year with tips on how to respond to online complaints. Let's hope he reads it.

Bluffing is not against the law but threats of that nature can be construed as blackmail by the person being threatened. Where did you get the idea that making people mad was an effective dispute resolution strategy?

The strongest leverage the OP had was the ability to terminate the contract. But that bridge has already been burned for no benefit without consulting a lawyer who would have warned that it would anger the architect and close the door to a timely negotiated settlement. Adding blackmail-like threats is only going to guarantee there will be no short term settlement and the OP doesn't have time to use any other method of dispute resolution.

I don't see how your online comments elsewhere about responding to online complaints about your work could possibly be of use to the architect in question. This seems a very odd forum in that contractors can grandstand and post self-serving spam promoting their businesses.

renovator8:

Threads have a way of meandering and a bit of thread drift is usually a good thing for readers. I have first-hand experience in dealing with extra-legal means of dispute resolution. If sharing that experience gets an occasional spam accusation, I'm good with that.

By first-hand experience do you mean you have been involved in a negotiation or mediation process between an owner and an architect or do you believe that refuting old customer complaints and threatening to post new complaints online are effective alternative dispute resolution methods? A definition of ADR can be found here.

renovator8:

You've said that an unhappy architectural customer must either "let it go or sue him". This just isn't so.

I had a lady hire me to document the differences between industry standards/manufacturer's instructions and the way her countertops were installed. It took nearly two years, but she got her tops replaced without letting it go or suing. Architects can be pressured the same way.

I was referring to the OP (remember the OP?) who had created a stand-off by prematurely firing the architect and shutting off alternate dispute resolution paths. Time is of the essence in this matter and the OP is not dealing with something as simple as a bad counter top. Threats of making public complaints are only going to delay a resolution and further damage the OP. As for the applicability of your counter top experience, I guess if all you have is hammer, everything looks like a nail.

"Threats of making public complaints are only going to delay a resolution and further damage the OP."

renovator8:

I've just linked to a first-hand example of a dogged homeowner who threatened to make public complaints that resulted in a resolution that occurred much more quickly and less expensively than it would have had it gone to court.

Please link to a first-hand example of when threats of making public complaints have delayed a resolution and further damaged a homeowner.

Just wanted to post an update. After months of threatening letters and getting a lawyer friend involved in the process, our architect refunded us the entire amount we paid him. Apparently he realized the error of his ways and was afraid of us filing a complaint with our state licensing board. He couldn't deny that he screwed up and gave us a set of plans that were unworkable and not what we agreed upon. We wasted quite a bit of time with him and have to start from scratch with a new architect for our project, but at least we didn't lose a lot of money in the process.

Thanks for the update. Another example of the proper use of legal and reputation pressure to resolve a dispute. Good for you.

Thanks, Joseph and others on this thread for your advice along the way.