What a mess! So far as I know, architects hold copyright on their own plans, so it might be tricky using them without his consent. On the other hand, you've more than paid for the right to use them, and surely he's under an obligation to fulfill his end of the deal by handing them over. I'd be talking to a contract lawyer at this point,

After he stated he would be on my property, even when not wanted/invited, I would be talking to a lawyer and getting a restraining order. That is just creepy.

Is he really an architect?

Sometimes in life you have to accept you made a big mistake, take your losses and move on. This might be one of those times ...

No, you can not use his plans and fire him both. Pick one.

You have learned a very tough lesson. You need to consult with a good real estate attorney to develop a strategy on how you can proceed. Don’t take any actions without this consultation because you could give this so called architect more ammunition against you. Be careful. The individual doesn’t sound very professional and I suspect he has had other similar issues. Sure doesn’t sound normal to me. I am afraid you are in for a long slog. So sorry. Breaks my heart to hear this is happening. Best of luck.

What standard agreement form (e.g. AIA B105, etc.) was used or, if it was something he wrote, post the document ownership and agreement termination clauses.

You will need an attorney to write a termination agreement but first you need to understand the terms of your agreement.

What is the current state of the design documents and payments to the architect. Is construction phase oversight included in the agreement?

.

Incidentally, an architect working by the hour should be expected to charge for locating your property on a zoning map and determining the zoning district, then finding the dimensional limitations and other requirements for that district in the appropriate zoning ordinance table while paying close attention to the footnotes that modify the requirements (frontage, yard setbacks, height etc) and calculating the open space and floor area ratios if appropriate. He would then summarize those findings and put them on the plans certifying their accuracy. Some of this may have been done by the surveyor but the architect would be foolish if he didn't verify it. Surveyors are usually very good at zoning calculations but I've occasionally found some big mistakes.

This work is most certainly not something an architect could have already known unless your town only has one zoning district.

Work things out with the architect in accordance with your contract with him. That will most likely be the most painless path to take. The contract is key; and for the things not covered in the contract, common sense and the person holding the purse strings is key. Be fair.

The architect wants to be involved in the project to assure the design is carried out as planned, both in his best interest and yours (theoretically). I have had projects where the home owner has made so many changes to the design after my involvement was completed that I am embarrassed to have anyone know that I was the architect on the project.

One of the major obstacles is the basement bedroom emergency escape & rescue window. Will the room never be used for sleeping? Did you tell the architect it would be used for sleeping?

I'm not taking the architect's side, I'm just trying to avoid a dispute and find a reasonable path to completion.

If you have included construction oversight in his agreement, you must allow him access to the site without giving notice or asking permission. Don't get hung up on the small stuff.

Yes, good advice here. I'm sorry the relationship has come to this point. But the terms and conditions of your owner-architect agreement are what govern in this situation.

I hope you can find a way to comete the project on a mutually agreeable way.

As for the basement bedroom, the code requirement for a proper egress window is a life safety issue. Is life safety not important to you?

If the exterior appearance is the most important issue, find a different location for the basement bedroom where a proper egress window is acceptable.

What other exits (egress or escape) are there from the basement other than the stair from the ground floor?

It will not be possible to help without knowledge of the house design and the agreement terms.

Do you see the inconsistency in the title you have given the thread?

“Client wants me to design non code compliant structure and has constant changes” is the other side of this coin.

Its certainly possible to fire the architect and use the drawings but it depends on the terms of the owner-architect agreement. If there is a long termination cause then its not a B105 and you might have a better chance of using the drawings. Its unlikely its a B101 but that would give you the right to use the drawings for a licensing fee. Of course, you could always offer to pay such a fee and sign an agreement that releases hm from liability for your use of the drawings. It would probably be cheaper than hiring a lawyer and potentially delaying construction.

I am going to expand a little bit, but more for just general discussion than any advice really.

The OP has a problem with this intersection of contracts, professional services and intellectual property. There are unique circumstances that make this question pretty difficult to answer over the internet.

There has always been a lot of nuance with IP law, but this is a rapidly developing area of law because of app development and it is unlikely that someone is informed unless they work in that area.

----

Generally, you can't take money without production. This means that I can't take money from you and then produce nothing. Even if I am working hard for you, I have to eventually deliver the product or service.

However, you also don't get that product or service and are not entitled to a refund if you terminate me without cause.

In between those two things is a massive grey area where there are varying degrees of cause to terminate. Contracts become much weaker and may fail altogether when there is cause to terminate.

So while the contract is important, if you are arguing that the architect is now operating under some sort of bad faith breach and believe that there is cause for termination then what is written in the contract becomes much less important.

----

This isn't to say you should rush out and start suing people, but often a letter from an attorney will suffice to resolve these situations equitably.

ETA: I am assuming from the tone of your post that he is unwilling to settle for a reasonable fee. As RES points out, it often less money to buy your way out of the agreement than it would be hire an attorney.

If I made a guess, I'd guess your architect may want rid of you as much as you want rid of her/him.

Have you considered offering a release from all liability, plus a fee in return for the right to use the plans without his name?

This what AIA B104 says about termination by the owner for convenience. Termination for cause can result in an expensive dispute.

I've never understood the combative approach some architects take. Why would he want to keep working with unhappy clients?

We're only hearing one side of the story...

The terms and conditions of AIA B104, above, give one example of what the OP may be able to do, subject to the terms of the actual owner-architect agreement.

If the OP really wants out, and still use the architect's work, then strive to achieve the result with an offer consistent with the terms above.

I agree. My termination clause says 7 days written notice and full payment, however, I would require an indemnification and hold harmless agreement if my drawings were going to be used and I would remove my name from them.

What architect can afford to make enemies? Most residential architects rely on their client references for work.

This guy is designing additions and thinks he can kick his clients around? Happy clients should be goal #1.

Remember we are only hearing one side of the story.

I heard Michael Graves speak to our architecture class at UT Austin (back in 1987, I think), and he described a project for a house in the Napa Valley area. The clients wanted the exterior of the house painted white, but he refused and used his own colors instead, which I believe included brown and green. After the project was over, the owners painted the house white the way they wanted it.

A lot of architects (not all) are arrogant and are more interested in building monuments to their ego than pleasing their clients. This is why it is extremely important to interview an architect, get references, and make sure that you love his work before hiring him. My ex-boss (who was also an interior designer) would ignore her clients wishes and design interiors to her own taste instead of the clients taste. The clients should not have hired her if they did not like her taste.

It might be best to let the petulant architect have his way and then change it afterwards. There is always the outside chance that you will like what he does.

Actually, many "starichtects" seem to care more about the photographic qualities of their built designs than any other aspect of a project.

Often, these architects may only be interested in designing their signature style of architecture. It becomes their trademark, and such architects may not deviate from it, regardless of owner desires.

Many such architects see their work as art, and as an artist they believe strongly in an artist's license to create personal works of art.

Often they are are commissioned by folks who want a photographically attractive home, one they can say was designed by a ""starichtect".

Fees are commensurate.

In such scenarios personal relations and owner desires may play a secondary role.

Choose wisely.

I've seen that happen in my city Virgil. Personally the two I'm thinking of, I wouldn't give two nickels to design me a house. But they do get written up all the time in the magazines.

Given free rein, our architect came up with this award-winning infill:

Heathdale Residence, Toronto. 2014, TACT Architects.

Not our preference. Instead, they delivered almost exactly what we wanted. (If it ever gets built in the fussiest, slowest acting municipality in the Toronto GTA is another matter.)

Now that really fits into the neighborhood! Really?? while the design is interesting, not in that location, or maybe I am missing something Worthy??

Worthy's photo is a project where the architect cares more for his personal signature style and the related architectural photography.

It's obvious that the project not only does not fit into the existing residential fabric, but virtually destroys it.

The project is one of the best arguments for an architectural review board by the city or jurisdiction.

And, the old mantra "its what the owner wanted" makes little difference to the damage the house does to the community and existing property values. Owner and architect share the blame equally.

Would you want to buy the house next door?

A lawyer for sure. And a call to the police if he shows up on your property uninvited. That’s trespassing. Possibly harassment or stalking.

That's what I would recommend for the owner and architect of the house in Worthy's photo...

As for the OP and her architect...that's a matter of the terms and conditions of the owner-architect agreement, which we don't know.

And it looks like the OP didn't get her desired response and has left the building.

Virgil - maybe she's doing the sensible thing and talking to a lawyer. We live in hope....

I'm sorry for your experience.

I'm not an attorney and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I have a couple of comments that might be worth discussing with your attorney.

First, the intent of copyright protection of architectural plans is to prevent the unauthorized copying of works which have some unique architectural quality. Similar protection is extended to musical compositions, written works, photos, pieces of art, etc. Your remodel plans might or might not meet the originality test.

If I recall correctly, plans for remodeling an existing home are treated differently under the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act than new home construction plans because they are generally specific to a single home and not likely to be replicated multiple times (unless the design is for remodeling a home in Levittown, that is.)

Second, an architect limiting use of plans is generally intended to ensure they are paid for services they provided. You indicated you've paid in excess of the original contract amount.

The other reason for limiting use of the plans is to prevent their sale to others and replication of the architectural work without compensation of the architect. Again, in the case of plans for a specific home remodel, this is not a likely outcome.

Best wishes for getting your project back on track. A good remodeler will help wash away the taste of a bad architect.

No lawyer, no site visits, No to termination. Japanese window desk treatment.

I contacted the city building department and our reviewer said if we get rid of the closet we won't need an egress issue, so remove the door and close up the opening, problem solved. Once again the architect is refusing to do this.

Get your filing, draw the revision cloud with red marker, write inside remove the closet, install non-egress window", resubmit - do not tell the architect. [You can digitally revise PDFs].

Tell this architect that you will be in contact with him when his services will be needed further. You already paid for his services and his job is complete. The fact that he want to be interior designer is irrelevant. Do not contact him for additional services, nor inform about the new submission.

Do not terminate the agreement, just don't act upon it.

Well... depending on the terms and conditions of the owner-architect agreement, either or both of the last two comments have the potential to put the OP clearly in violation of the owner-architect agreement for no reason.

The best advice at this point may be for the OP

to try to resolve the issue with the architect, according to the terms of the agreement. It's probably the least expensive resolution.

Lacking such a resolution, advice from an attorney is probably the next best step.

Acting unilaterally in violation of the agreement does not have a potentially happy and inexpensive outcome.

But since the OP has left the building we are just talking to ourselves.

People are often afraid to consult lawyers because they see thousands of dollars in fees in their future. In fact, in my personal experience, paying a lawyer a few hundred bucks to clearly understand your legal options is money well spent. On two occasions I was able to use the lawyer's advice to deal with the problem myself, without having to resort to the courts.

Currently the windows on the drawings are not egress windows so all that needs to be done is add BT's note deleting the closet and closet doors. A hand written note is fine.

I would go one step further and recommend that if the architect shows up on site, don't turn him away, just let him observe the work and pay his bills and ask the contractor to send his requests for payment directly to you. You should be able to use his drawings as long as you keep paying him and he will be cheaper than a lawyer. Don't give him a cause to terminate the agreement.

But it would help to know exactly what his contract says regarding construction phase services and the anticipated cost.

Its also important to find out if the building department will require him to verify that the work was done according to the drawings before a C of O is issued.

Contracting with a residential designer or architect shouldn't obligate a client to pay for contract administration/contractor oversight/contractor supervision/contractor hand holding. Those services should be optional. And clients should think long and hard about engaging a contractor whom they feel requires any of them.

I am wondering just what can the architect do if the contractor and client substitute a regular basement window and just omit the closet walls and door. Is the client obligated to build the design according to the plans? I am curious as to what recourse could the architect have?

RES's comment about possibility that the architect might need to verify the work completed does not seem to be the case in my area. Is this commonly part of the process before the project gets final approvals? We found an issue with our plans and added some new framing which wasn't clearly necessary until an existing wall was removed. The architect just submitted a letter with drawing to the city before the framing inspection and all was well in the world.

> Is the client obligated to build the design according to the plans?

In few places the county forces to file an updated plan, if you don't. Not my county, we can still use paper napkins as the plan.

> I am curious as to what recourse could the architect have?

For what? The client has a right to build whatever he/she wants as long as it passed HOA/county review and approved by planning department.

I hate these situations: Typically [my experience] a GC will bad mouth an architect, and an architect bad mouths GC, subs are stating we have been building this/that way for 50 years suggesting either/or an architect or a builder not competent.

If you work on the project - you need to stop this immediately. Stating this is the shared product - no one allowed to bad mouth anyone. Bad for business. I tell all the subs if you have ideas bring them in preferably at the design phase. The architect should be helpful. This is not right. This architect should be submitting mutual release, forcing himself on the client who can not work with him - just bad.

Been there, done that. It’s awful. Not only the wasted money but the wasted time! The architects job is done, you paid them, lose their number. Take the printouts and find a contractor who can use them. Depending on the state you live in, if the square footage is below a certain number, you don’t need certified architect plans, just get a draftsman to draw up construction plans and then get the permits. Just because they’re an architect doesn’t mean they’re a good one and if they’re not listening to you, that to me means they’re not a good one.

OP - there's some very bad advice here that has the potential to land you in a world of pain. If the architect is as difficult as you say, it would be a major mistake to use his plans without his consent, or to otherwise obstruct him, until you fully understand the terms of your contract with him. You need to know that before you take another step. It's bad enough if you end up having to sue him but it's going to be a lot worse if he sues you. Spend an hour with a lawyer, not the internet. It will be time well spent.

As @bry911 explained earlier, a contract is the first place you look to, when trying to resolve a dispute. But there is so much more to it. Lay people frequently misinterpret what their contract actually means for their particular situation.

So, there almost certainly is a way out. @Shelle Craig is unlikely to be tied to this architect for life. This contract can be dissolved, and all parties can move on.

But the details absolutely require the help of a competent lawyer. If everybody agrees, this could be a cheap and easy negotiation that will only cost a few hundred dollars to the lawyer. If both parties are unreasonable, this can take a long time and cost a good chunk of money -- but it's still better doing that now rather than when construction has started.

So, as others have said, go talk to a lawyer already.

OP.....you're getting 'totally' Sc(^&*%^Y......get a lawyer!!!!!

When I said "it would help to know exactly what his contract says" I should have said it is "essential" to know that. We're discussing something of which we know far too little and giving in to the temptation to speculate.

If the OP doesn't want to share the terms of the contract with us (which I understand completely) there's not much we can do to help.

As for an architect overseeing the work, I will not design a project for which I cannot provide construction phase oversight. If I were to not be allowed on a construction site at any time, I would remove my name from the project at the building department. I've only needed to do that 3 times in 50 years.

In most towns I have worked in, before a C of O can be issued, if there is an architect or engineer of record, he/she must sign an affidavit stating that he/she has inspected the property and that it conforms to the submitted plans and the codes of the city and state.

I suspect this standoff will be resolved by a negotiation with the help of legal advice.

Charles, almost no general contractor or sub contractor believes they need checking or supervision by an architect or owner.

That's the very reason it's necessary.

This is another reason architects like to be involved in the construction process.

https://www.houzz.com/discussions/5771749/basement-i-beam-off-center-new-construction

More popcorn, please!

@Mark That is if an Architect gets off his A$$ and visit the site, instead of doing a drive-by and telling his customers I was just there and everything looks good.

At the risk of repeating myself, an engineer and I inspected a house renovation project where a new 12 ft. steel beam supported a brick wall over a new opening from a kitchen to a dining area. An odd piece of drywall was covering the middle part of the beam so the engineer asked that it be removed and after a short loud argument with the drywall contractor, it was removed revealing large notches cut out of the top and bottom flanges for a plumbing pipe. The engineer showed no surprise and told me he would issue a repair sketch when he got back to his office.

I not only inspect all the work in a house as often as I think necessary, I make at least two visits with the engineer. But one thing I never do is speak of a deficiency in front of an owner unless it involves a change in the contract amount.

By the way, that GC was one of the best I've ever worked with and I had worked with him before and worked with him again later. He learned to send me photos of critical parts of the work and even sent me progress photos of the framing from a drone.