It is my job here on these forums to be dissenting...So here I go. For me, the problem isn't that he lied about a sub being closed, it is that you checked to see if he was telling the truth...

We are seeing one side of the story here and, of course, we all agree with you. However, "lies" rarely happen in a vacuum, and without access to the entire story we really have no idea how things got to this point. Certainly trust has been eroded, if it ever existed, and these relationships are very rough without any trust. To me, this looks like a breakdown in the vetting process. If you don't trust the contractor in the beginning then don't hire him, but even I admit this is me making an assumption.

In general, non compulsive liars tell lies to avoid pain. If every time your contractor made a mistake you raked him over the coals then obviously lying is a reaction. If the choice is spend hours with you micromanaging every detail or just agreeing and getting you off the phone, well he is still a liar if he does it. On the other hand, maybe the guy planned to screw you from the get go and you did great to catch it. Or he just can't take responsibility for any mistake.

Personally, in business dealings, I don't care who is at fault. I expect each party to act in protection of their interest, I often pick up the tab for something I am not responsible for because I understand that forcing someone into an unprofitable situation is really not in my overall best interest. In the end, as JDS points out, it doesn't matter who is at fault for a mistake, finding a workable solution is in the interest of both parties and when people stop assigning blame and responsibility and focus on an equitable solution then it is just easier to get a project done.

As a final thought - You would be amazed how effective two compliments for every criticism is. "I love what you did with the XXXXX, and the XXXXX looks great, but we got the wrong door, what do you think we should do about that?"

In terms of name calling, I actually went back and looked and I have
identified factual lies and the support for them, and said it is hard
for me to work with "a liar" in general as it erodes trust, but I have
avoided calling him a "liar".

You said to him that "it's hard for me to work with a liar", but you don't think that that is calling him a liar? If that's the case, then you are definitely splitting hairs. You called him a liar.

I'm not saying he's at all in the right, but there's a good chance that you've contributed to the unpleasant situation by being too blunt.

Engineer. Enough said. I come from a family of them. Interpersonal isn't their strong point. Letting go snd letting others do their job isn't their strong point. If you don't think that's true, then read your post again. It's true

You may not think you've insulted the contractor, but yes, you have. It isn't surprising that he doesn't want to work with you. But he will. But he needs an apology. If you aren't big enough to take that on without further insulting him, then maybe getting the house completed isn't as important to you as your pride. And control issues. The guy has had a long build with all of that on board. Be sympathetic to that. Focus on the end goal.

My engineer husband is by FAR easier to negotiate with than I am. He's also more level headed - he'll get quiet. I will be very direct (I do not, however, raise my voice, call people names, etc). I am also less patient / forgiving - especially when people have large chunks of my money. It's probably because I handle the money...

platypuspup - you called him a liar. arguing over semantics isn't going to resolve this. That being said - such like Martha Stewart learned -it's not the crime, it's the coverup. He needs to tell you the truth, and you need to be able to call him out when he's erred (nice way of saying it) in a way that works toward resolution - but can still be firm.

My house contracted for 9 months build. It has been 14 months, and landscapes are still not done yet.

I was just moving in 1 month ago. He shorted and lowered my two retaining walls without consent (so, which was made my concreted driveway shorter for his benefits). He collected draws and fees without showing receipts for upgraded from "allowance". He substituted my three cast-iron tubs for his Americanist tubs without telling nor credit me back. He did not credit what I paid on my own. He did the deck not as shown on plans. He did not cleaned the house as he should.

But, I did still pay him all excepted landscapes, grading, and handrails, which he was self deducted from last withdraw.

I told him all problems mentioned above with very light and polite way that I just let you know but no big deal to me although you could do exactly what I asked even cost me more I would be happier, before handed that last withdraw.

So, my landscape has not done yet. But I am so happy because, he appreciated my generous and returned by doing excellent job for my grading with water drain ways, and supervised when sub do installed front door hand rails. I knew the handrail costed more on him. I have the best handrail in that sub for the time being :-)

Sometimes, you have to let go somethings that could not be better if arguing or fighting.

Can you tell me JDS where I made an insulting characterization? I

You said "contractor" lies...not "my" contractor, generalizing it across all. English matters.

I was asking a question, it was not a statement. Like if there is something I don't know about that is considered acceptable to all contractors? Clearly it was answered as no, but as this is the first and only one i have worked with I wanted to know if it was normal, or just him.

And it is true, while I do have an end goal of wanting the house done, it is really really hard to let things slide when we have paid him 3x my salary for one year of work. And that is ONLY his fee- costs were on top (cost-plus contract). I guess I just expected integrity and civility for that price. Silly me for being to literal with my wording in a world where apparently words are more hurtful than actions.

It is clear though, especially from what I have heard, that I am too idealistic. I have decided to go silent and let others be intermediaries as suggested.

If this is a sample of your communication style, then you own at least 50% of the issue. Probably more. Do you seriously think that you didn't insult the man?

A lie is a lie is a lie... You named the thread "Rant about contractor lies" and then went on to ask a question that we all assumed was rhetorical as it was in a rant about all the lies your contractor told. Now you ask us to believe that you were only asking a question about the standard practice of contractors. I am dubious that you yourself are not guilty of stretching the truth...

But giving you the benefit of the doubt, and answering your question...I imagine builders are the same as any other business. At times being honest and upfront is profitable and at times being somewhat dishonest and deceptive is profitable and they do a bit of both. To pretend that any business owes you honesty is being incredibly naive. In fact, there are times where being honest is unethical for a business (I know...mind blown). However, I think most contractors find that honesty helps develop trust and trust is essential to their working relationship. I also think that trust is a two way street and it is hard to analyze the problem without looking at the entire situation. Once the relationship between a contractor and a client is completely blown, it can become a "no holds barred" brawl.

What you really need in a contractor situation is goal alignment. There are ways to find a contractor who is genuinely interested in your project, who shares your goals and who gets where you are coming from. However, many times people use a contractor that they have little rapport with because the money, time or previous work is desirable. Usually breakdowns like this happened at hiring not during the process.

Finally, you are tilting at windmills...In the end, you have a house to build. Standing on principle is easy - find an attorney, hand him your checkbook, and teach the contractor a lesson.

Sometimes the written word is your one and only friend. To rationalize the lies of a GC as being a result of a persons "communication style" is stupid. Nobody forced him to make up excuses or deceptively use the wrong doors. On the other hand everybody is right on the money about doing wgat you need to do to finish your build.

"Because I said he lied." Is that not an insulting characterization?

It is possible to confront someone who has misrepresented relevant facts without using characterizations. Making the issue personal only limits your paths to a resolution. If you can't find a resolution bring in a lawyer and stop talking.

This discussion may be an opportunity for the OP to rant but it raises the important issue of dispute resolution. The alternative to a resolution is to pursue it in a court which is expensive and perhaps inevitable but that is no reason to throw obstacles in the path of a possible out of court resolution. You can always give up and sue. And it has nothing to do with whether a characterization was true or not. The OP needs to find a way to avoid losing money before lashing out at the contractor.

You are dealing with someone who builds for a living and this is not the first time he has been on the wrong side of a dispute. Lashing out at him with insults works in his favor since it gives him a reason to stop work and demand payment.

The first thing to review is the contract provisions for correcting work that doesn't conform to the contract, then review the provisions for termination of the contract. If none of that was properly addressed in the contract, everyone is likely to share in the financial loss and then the ability to negotiate will be even more critical.

Don't throw away your options in anger unless you are wealthy and willing to spend money on a lawyer with an unpredictable chance of being reimbursed for your loss.

We've seen this situation many times on the GW, usually when an owner fires a GC before exploring a resolution and then posts the ugly details in search of sympathy. I sympathize with the emotion but not the strategy.

"wrote he would order new ones, told us he had ordered new ones, and then installed the old ones refurbished and hoped we wouldn't notice."

-referring to your doors. What specifically happened here? How did he refurbish the doors?

"We are at the punch list stage (down to about 40 items on it), part of the problem"

-you said he wants to collect his check (10k) and walk away, rather than completing the 40 item punch list. What types of items are on the punch list? Are they big ticket items or small items or a combination? Can you be specific?

Honestly, I can see why you are upset. Building a house is stressful. I still think it will pay to try to get things in perspective and get this over with. Life is too short and all of that....

platypuspup I really do hope that you just needed to vent, because it will most likely cost you far more (financially, emotionally) to engage the courts.

This whole process is so stressful, and as ILoveRed pointed out, it will be best to put it all in perspective. At the end of the day, you want to be at peace as you move into the house that you love.

I think that most of us who come here are also simply hoping for the exact same thing, as we trudge through the build process. In the end, I want to be in one piece, I want my marriage to survive it all (thank you, Lord, for the most patient husband who lets everything just roll off his back), and I want to still have a little bit of money in the bank as I sip my glass of wine on my back porch with my dog at my feet. I swear, some days I think that will never happen....

I understand the conflict resolution, level headed part of this conversation that JDS is preaching. But when I'm paying someone 10's of thousands of dollars to do a job and they flat out lie to me, I WILL call them out and I will NOT worry about hurting their "feelings" or insulting them. Is it not an insult to me as the customer to be lied to multiple times and cheated out of materials that I've paid for?

Having said that, I think Bry is right on the money, "trust is a two way street and it is hard to analyze the problem without looking at the entire situation". I also think this comes down to your relationship with your GC. Communication style needs to be established at first meeting. I told my GC during our very first interview that if I had a question, I will ask it, and I will require explanation for things I don't understand. I explained that just because I question things doesn't mean I think they are wrong, I'm just the kind of person that has to fully understand the "who's, what's, when's where's and why's, in order to feel comfortable making decisions. I made it clear that if that wasn't acceptable, we wouldn't be working together.

The first time I was embroiled in a serious dispute was over 40 years ago and someone tangentially involved warned me that anything I said to the other side would be used against me in ways I would regret.

I am simply passing that excellent advice on; aggressively calling someone out for cheating should be left to to your lawyer.

Good luck.

wow, we must have the same contractor, it sounds exactly what I went through. I did my due diligence in checking references and interviewing but made the wrong choice. I tried to resolve the issues many times to get him to just finish. Ended up hiring an attorney, he walked out, and I just sat on it for a couple months. I ended up talking to my cabinet guy who gave me a couple contractors to contact. I ended up hiring one of them to finish and have used them on two other projects. Once the contract was signed the original contractor became completely unprofessional, dishonest, and unethical. I can't even post reviews because he threathened to sue me for slander, so I am sure he is continuing to do the same to others. He must of had some baggage or issues with dealing with women because he was totally unreasonable. Every day I got home I would get chewed out by him for something. It's not like I was changing my mind or anything, he just wanted someone to scream at.

It would be nice to get a "negotiated settlement," but that's not always how the end game works. Sometimes the contractor just walks away and leaves you hanging, and maybe that's the best thing that could happen for both of you. Escalating the emotional drama is just about the worst thing you can do, and it's useless.

Importantly, you want to know whether he has paid all the subs, because of liens. If he has not paid the subs, then he may have screwed up his cash flow, and might be on the verge of bankruptcy. If he goes bankrupt, you won't get any work or money out of him, obviously. He'll just start another business, under another name. It may not be "fair," but that's the way it often goes.

(I've been on the other side of this equation, as a sub. There are guys out there who still owe me money, but I'll never get it out of them. :p)

I think all the above applies, even if you have a hyper-detailed, ironclad contract. You can get a mediator, or a lawyer, or a judgment, but in the end, you can't really make this guy do anything he doesn't want to do. You probably can't even get him arrested, as this is a civil contract matter.

OTOH, if he thinks he is "in the right," and is simply seeing red where you are concerned, he will put his ears back and get mule stubborn just to get back at you. It may not be fair, or professional, or whatever, but it is human nature.

At any rate, trying to get good work out of someone you hate, who hates you, generally just isn't worth the huge effort and stress, IMO. But money fixes almost everything. IIWY, I'd document the unfinished work (with pictures), figure out the lien situation, and write this guy a "go away and never darken my door again" check. A quick resolution is far better than months of expensive depositions and an unfinished house.

Yeah, this is where I am at. It is not worth the money to continue to work with someone I don't trust. I am willing to write a check and see what happens and hire someone else to finish if necessary.

so - I will share my experience today.

I got a letter from a contractor asking for money in advance of our contractual terms. it was not a nice letter. essentially they were holding my project hostage and trying to unilaterally change the contract terms. After I peeled myself off the ceiling, I wrote them back (at this point, clear communication and documentation is your friend) and enumerated the issues I had with their demand, and specifically asked them to keep working on my project in good faith, as we have worked together to date, and get together to discuss.

I was loaded for bear. I had every eventuality nailed down. I was NOT HAPPY. I was fully prepared to walk out and felt it might come to that even though we're WAY too far down this path with them to stop / start over.

The tone of the meeting was VERY different. First they apologized for the aggressive tone of the email and explained how they wanted to manage the payments going forward with, IMO, could still be done within the confines of the contract. What they were asking made sense and I am going to do a construction draw to cover what they want. We started the meeting mostly saying that we were taken aback by the tone and demand of the email when it was so contrary to every other communication.

Bottom line, new project manager was al little pushy, come cash flow issues on that particular side of the business were squeezing them and our project has had more engineering time than they planned. We walked out with continued work, I'll give them money, and we have an installation date for our panels.

So - advice - give a face to face meeting a chance and start out with concern / trying to understand why you got something that wasn't in character with your GC's other good work and go from there.

Signed - totally less stressed today....

^ cash flow issues on that particular side of the business were squeezing them

Yep. In my experience, that's often the case. Too many contractors are running on fumes in terms of capitalization, literally hand to mouth. Every advance pays the pressing bills, and they are never ahead of the game-- they have little or no cash reserve. One late check, or a job that falls through, and they are SOL.

That's when the lying and other craziness tends to start, because they get desperate. I can't tell you how many times a contractor said to me, back in the day, "I'll pay you next week, and a little extra, I've got a good price on this new job..." and so forth and so on. Of course, next week rolls around and there's a new excuse.

It really motivated me to finish my degree and get out of that scene, I can tell you.

If I had to pick a contractor these days, I would not go to clients for recommendations. I would talk to the local lumberyards and the subs-- especially the subs near the end of the job, like drywall and painting. These are the folks who often get stiffed, because the contractor has used money that should have paid them, to start up the next job and keep the ball rolling!

I should say that not all contractors are like this, some are pretty good business people, and don't extend themselves too far. But there are too many who might be good at their trade, but can't manage money at all.

I can't imagine having a contract that allows the GC to pay the subs directly. We required a Title Company to process our payments to subs, or we pay them directly if they can't wait until our monthly draw is submitted to the title company. The subs sign off on a lien release before they get paid. The only money that goes into our GC's hands is his fee, which was divided evenly by the number of months our contract is for. This allows us to see every single invoice, for everything from trusses, concrete, to drywall screws. It obviously helps that our GC gets a flat fee, and we don't have a cost plus contract. This way, we're not getting jacked up prices to pad the GC's pockets.

If you think that there is not an easy way that a GC can get a kickback from the subs with the above method of payment, you'd be wrong. Bottom line is that anyone can be sleazy and get around any rules you put in place. Comforting, huh?

My comment was in regards to a GC spending up all the money that should go to subs towards the end of a build, as mentioned by scone911. I'm sure there's a way for a GC to get kickbacks from subs. The point I was making was that a GC's cashflow problems can't affect the build, with the "rules" we have in place.

If the GC doesn't pay the subs I can't imagine the contract could make him responsible for their work in which case he is not a GC but a Project Manager of some sort. This is not necessarily a solution without drawbacks to the owner.

Each sub we've used warranties their work for a minimum of 1 year, some up to 10. Whatever draw backs there are (that we haven't seen) are better than a sub not being paid by the GC and filing a lien against the property, IMO.

The last time I built new, I did a "bank job;" it was a portfolio loan, which is pretty rare these days. Anyway, the bank insisted that my GC produce all the invoices from all the subs, and paid them directly. On the back of the check, below the endorsement, there was legal wording to the effect of: "by signing this check, you are giving a lien release," etc. I can't remember the exact wording.

My GC didn't love it, but he had bills to pay, including his carpentry crew, who were (unusually) employees. I ended up taking on some of the GC responsibilities, because I couldn't help but hover around anyway, and earned a discount at the end. The bank didn't care, as we came out under budget, and they had another set of eyes looking over the project! So it worked out fairly well.

Of course, there was a lot of trust between us, and there really has to be some level of trust when you are doing business. You have to look out for your own interests, of course, but if you come into the situation assuming that the other guy is going to screw you a lot, it can't work.

I'm not even sure having several layers of supervision always works either.

With all respect to JDS and the other pros here, an inspector, RE agent, builder, or architect is going to think twice before dissing a colleague who is in a position to send them more work. Construction is very much an "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" community. It runs on referrals and interpersonal favors, not just overt kickbacks. There is even a certain amount of intermarriage, so it becomes a family thing. Nobody likes to make waves.

In any case, no profession is free of people who are willing to bend the rules. Unfortunately, there are a hundred different ways to cheat, and the client will never be the wiser. This has been going on since the pyramids.

So I think you have to follow the money and understand what everyone's incentives are, even if they are professionals with a supposed fiduciary-like obligation to put the client's interests before their own. But you can find people who are reasonably honest, especially if they are paid something above the "lowest bidder" level. Just don't expect perfection.

scone911

I have never known a residential general contractor who didn't have carpenters on his payroll. Without an on-site project team the GC would be a Construction Manager.

An architect never provides another "layer of supervision"; only a General Contractor can be responsible for supervising the work of a construction project.

A contract between an Owner and a Contractor is "arms length" and does not have a "fiduciary-like obligation to put the client's interests before their own" but an architect does. An architect works for the Owner as their agent and is not a party to the construction contract. My loyalty is to the Owner and that is from where I get referrals.

Trust is never an issue on my jobs because I spare my clients from dealing directly with the GC or subs and after 45 years its pretty difficult to take advantage of me.

As an architect I have never gotten any work from a contractor, realtor or inspector nor would I consider any of them to be a colleague.

I have never scratched anyone's back. When I have recommended a builder, surveyor or consultant it has been because I thought it was in the best interest of the Owner. I never take advantage of Owners because that is the sole source of my reputation and income. The last thing I want to do is be saddled with an unqualified general or sub contractor.

Perhaps your experience is with design-builders, developers or in another country.

Too many long responses to read so I apologize if this was already stated... I am a responsible commercial contractor. Do not release more money until ALL of the work is complete to your satisfaction. Additionally, do not release any more money until you have signed and notarized releases of lien from ALL subs and suppliers. Send him a certified letter directing him to return to work within 72 hours to complete all of the work or you will have the work completed at his expense. At that point I would not let him near my home without supervision. I would then give him 30 days to respond/return prior to having the work completed by others.

The general public is very weak in dealing with contractors and there are MANY out there that pray on them.

That approach works when the contract is written to allow it and the owner knows how to implement it. From what I read on this forum, that is not always the case for inexperienced homeowners who lack representation and the builder writes the contract.

^ JDS, I'm not implying anything at all about you in particular, so please don't take it personally. FWIW, all my personal experience is in the USA, although I have relatives in drafting, engineering, and architecture in England, Canada, and Australia.

My experience with small contractors doing custom homes is, they generally sub out framing and finishing these days. Bigger contractors doing production work tend to have carpenter employees, obviously. I should add that when I say "employee" I'm primarily thinking of someone outside the family hired at arm's length. As opposed to a contractor in partnership with his sons or daughters, or the wife who often works as the bookkeeper/office manager, which is, as you know, a very common arrangement. There may be some better word that sums up this distinction, but I can't think of one offhand.

I think there were more carpenter employees, in the sense I mean, at various points in the past, but I have seen more subbing out in recent years, especially where illegal immigrant labor is used to cut costs. Of course, the Great Recession also forced layoffs across the board.

I'm glad that you do a good job protecting your clients' interests, which is why I used the phrase "fiduciary-like." I wish that were true for all architects and other professionals, but IMO it's just not realistic to expect that that will always be the case. Just common sense.

I'm also glad you're able to make a living working directly with owners and only them. Maybe that's the way it should be. But you and I both know that many, if not most, architects don't operate that way. They may work directly for an owner, for a builder doing residential or commercial, they may consult with municipalities, corporations, or work with churches. They have a mixed practice, embedded in a community where they rely on many local contacts for work.

That certainly does not, by itself, make a person corrupt, by any means. But no rational human being is going to anger his client base when he has bills to pay, and some people will end up compromised and conflicted, some of the time. That's not unique to the construction business, either.

At any rate, as a consumer, I would not walk through the world expecting my fellow human beings to wear haloes. I expect them to err sometimes, as do I. So my advice to the OP is: be aware, keep your expectations and trust level reasonable, figure out where the incentives are, and you'll probably do o.k.

Again, no reflection on you, or anyone else in particular, at all.

"But you and I both know that many, if not most, architects don't operate that way."

That is untrue and patronizing.

We've apparently had very different experiences with home building in general and architects in particular.

I find it insulting that you would accuse architects of not representing their clients interests as required by any owner-architect contract. It would be grossly unethical to compromise that responsibility through an association of any kind. And I don't know any architects who work for anyone other than an owner and I've been an architect for 45 years and I've practiced in a dozen states and know a lot of architects.

In every state where I have practiced, an architect is not allowed to stamp his or her work as the employee of a company that does not meet the state requirements for practicing architecture (usually at least one licensed owner but sometime all of them).

I don't believe you know much about the practice of architecture in the US which is not unusual or noteworthy but you should not be making inaccurate defamatory claims on a public forum.

Below is an excerpt from the Rules of Professional Conduct for architects in my state:

"Departure therefrom by act or omission shall be deemed to constitute misconduct warranting disciplinary action by the Board."

(2) Conflict of Interest.

(a) An architect shall not accept compensation for his or her services from more than one party on a project unless the circumstances are fully disclosed to and agreed to (such disclosure and agreement to be in writing) by all interested parties.

(b) If an architect has any business association or direct or indirect financial interest which is substantial enough to influence his or her judgment in connection with his or her performance of professional services, the architect shall fully disclose in writing to his or her client or employer the nature of the business association or financial interest, and if the client or employer objects to such association or financial interest, the architect will either terminate such association or interest or offer to give up the commission or employment.

(c) An architect shall not solicit or accept compensation from material or equipment suppliers in return for specifying or endorsing their products.

(d) When acting as the interpreter of building contract documents and judge of contract performance, an architect shall render decisions impartially, favoring neither party to the contract.

Sorry you feel that way, but honestly I can't see anything that's defamatory at all. I realize there are plenty of laws and professional requirements about protecting the client's interest, there are similar codes of conduct in many professions. Real estate agents, for example.

But the simple truth is, people break laws and ignore rules of professional conduct sometimes. That's neither controversial nor defamatory, it's simply common knowledge. These bad actors provide lawyers with a living.

I don't understand what you're saying about contractors not being in business with family members. I'm sure we've all dealt with contractors who worked in partnership with sons, daughters, wives, cousins, etc. (It's particularly common, in my experience, for a father to start a business in a trade, and start teaching the sons to take over, often starting in high school.)

I can give you examples off the top of my head, and I'm sure others can, too. My last painter worked with his wife's brother. The one I used in my other home had a whole crew consisting of his wife, sons, and his cousin's son. The wife did the books, but also did wallpaper removal and painted trim. The boys did the prep and undercoating. These are just recent examples, but in my experience a lot of the trades operate as family businesses. I don't see how that can possibly be controversial.

Even when people are not relatives, there are plenty of other personal connections. Just for example. My handymen happened to go to the same church as my realtor. My plumber is the son of a cabinet guy I know. Especially in small communities, everyone seems to know everyone else. I don't find connections like that odd at all, and I've encountered many such arrangements in my time.

Your statement "and I don't know any architects who work for anyone other than an owner" is true, in the sense that architects do work for many different sorts of "owners" who might be residential clients, industrial, commercial, etc. as I wrote above.

But when an architect (or any other professional) works for an individual on a residential project, and then recommends a trades person for whom he has also worked, and who may be in a position to give him more work in the future, he is potentially in a conflict of interest situation. Which is what the code of professional conduct is attempting to deal with. If this kind of situation had not lead to problems in the past, the conflict of interest provision would not need to exist.

But obviously there have been problems. Again, the code can't prevent people from acting badly, no code can. It can only provide a disciplinary framework for dealing with people who do break the rules.

Again, my remarks are general, and not about anyone in particular. I'm not picking on architects to the exclusion of the rest of humanity. I've seen conflicts of interest play out in other professions, e.g. the medical community.

But I do stand by my statements. People in the construction business, like every other business, are a mixed bag. Most are pretty decent folks, some are insanely great, and a few are bad apples. I'm trying to help people avoid the bad apples. I'm certainly not going to pretend that any trade or profession is populated by perfect beings who never do any wrong.

where is that pass the popcorn icon when you need it?

Reminds you of the old days, don't it?

The talk about an architect trying to get more work from a "trades person" by recommending him is just malicious nonsense.

Like so many threads which go on for an extended time, often the comments of the original poster are forgotten and folks begin to take sides on other commentators. Of course, this is pointless! Can we please get back to the person ranting about their contractor? Or is the thread essentially dead, and there's nothing new to be added?

It's all yours; I'm done.

Edited because I decided I didnt really need to comment on anothers comment on a comment.

No malice express or implied, nor intent to defame-- although I suspect libel would be a more correct term.

Just for the record, I don't spend my days plotting to maliciously defame the good name of architects, or anyone else. Of course, if JDS thinks differently, he can take it up with the Houzz staff.

At any rate, malicious defamation and/or libel is a crime, and that's a serious accusation which shouldn't be made lightly. It would be a real shame for Gardenweb if people were to be accused of criminal intent every time they wanted to join a thread complaining about a contractor, plumber, decorator, architect, or what have you. Gardenweb has always been a safe place for folks to vent, and I hope it stays that way.

I think the OP just wanted to kvetch. Maybe the contractor really is a bad apple, maybe not. But now that she's decided to pay the guy off, she can move on, and the problem is solved.

"malicious defamation" is your description, not mine. Just tell us where you have known one architect to have behaved in the unethical manner you have attributed to the entire profession or retract your statements.

Jesus christ....This is ridiculous.

Sorry, not going to "retract my statements," which never included a blanket condemnation of "the entire profession."

And although I could give a couple of examples, you wouldn't believe me anyway, since you claim upthread that I don't know anything about architecture.

So arguing with you wastes everyone's time and energy. As they say, "don't feed the trolls." You're ignored.

I do agree that this is getting ridiculous.

no, it passed ridiculous quite a while back.

now folks are just looking for stuff to be offended about.

Scone, can you recommend a builder, I, too, would like to have a bunker constructed. Everybody is out to get me, too. So I sympathize. I have already rejected so many GC because of ties to the Tri-lateralists and Illuminati.

But you really believe that large GC firms have phalanxes of in-house carpenters as employees? (w-2 recipients) haha.

These agency issues are one of the most researched and well understood things in business, especially in accounting, where the agency issue is constantly present. There is extensive research on small mom and pop businesses all the way up to multi-national corporations, and the research almost always points to the same conclusion. Despite the prevalent belief otherwise, business relationships are almost always customer driven. Businesses simply do things to make customers happy, even when it is less profitable.

There is a sociological and psychological need to create conspiracies to explain less than satisfactory outcomes, which explains why so many people believe that every field has insiders and outsiders and the deck is stacked against outsiders.

I am not saying this is what happened here, but sometimes I like to throw a fact or two out there, just because I believe in the power of knowledge.

P.S. defamation in the form of either slander or libel is not a crime...

Sombreuil, apparently that's what the other guy believes. Maybe you should read the thread.

Bry, good to know what the research says, but that doesn't help the individual much when having to deal with a bad apple. Nothng conspiratorial about it.

Maybe we need a separate forum for pros to complain about impossible customers who lie, don't pay up, etc. Equal time.

Bad apples rarely stay in business very long. Despite arguments to the contrary, the market is really quite efficient at removing people who are bad at business, and it is even more efficient at matching bad businesses with bad consumers. While it is true, there is a Nigerian lottery scam, they have a pretty limited customer base.

In the end, (1) do your due diligence, (2) find an architect/builder/sub that you communicate well with and (3) who you trust. Then trust them (and keep trusting them until you have significant reason not to). Architect, builder and subcontractor relationships require a lot of work and are under a lot of strain anyway. Don't destroy your chance of success by going into the relationship assuming they are somehow screwing you. It just becomes a self fulfilling prophecy - you end up poisoning the relationship while trying to "keep them honest."