FAQ.04

Question:

Based on a Client-Architect agreement, with a purchase order (contents not known) on a project for a charity. The question is regarding rights and responsibilities of an architect and client after the termination of their contract: “... Can the architect “pull” the permit? Also, can the drawings still be used to complete the project? ...”

Short Answer:

Based on the limited information provided, on the presumption that this is an OBC Part 3 project the following is noted:

• To “pull a permit” in construction parlance usually indicates applying for and receiving a permit from the authority having jurisdiction (e.g. a building permit, from the Municipality). In the context of this question it is understood that the writer intended “to cause the permit to be revoked”.
• Once a building permit has been issued, only the authority having jurisdiction, e.g. the Chief Building Official of the Municipality in question can revoke a building permit, and only where there are building code or zoning compliance issues that give cause to do so become known.
• Prior to the issuance of a permit, only the applicant can withdraw the application.
• An architect cannot, only by withdrawing their services give cause for revocation (i.e. their commitment to undertake general review) or withdrawing their documents to cause the permit to be void. Additionally, they cannot prevent the drawings upon which permit has been granted from continuing to be used for construction.

However,

• if the architect’s services are terminated, the architect must formally notify the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) that they are no longer on the project and are no longer providing general review.
• The client in turn must retain another architect to ensure that general review continues without interruption.
• If there is interruption in general review, this might give cause for revocation of the building permit by the AHJ – or a “stop work order” until the requirements of the permit are met (i.e. an architect providing general review).
• Note that only an architect can provide general review on a project designed by an architect.

The above however raises a number of related issues that should be considered by both parties relating to rights and responsibilities of each: copyright; request/consent for another architect to use the documents prepared under the terminated agreement; impacts to the project such as costs, continuity, etc.

Expanded Answer:

Additional considerations for both parties include:

• Cost to retain another Architect to complete the general review may represent an additional cost, which may also be considerably more than what is remaining under the original agreement. (Considering additional costs would be realized for another architect to review the construction documents, past correspondence and progress of construction, etc., in addition to picking up where the previous architect left off.)
  
  
• Copyright for the design and construction documents remains the property of the authoring architect, alteration of these by another is prohibited without their consent or agreement. Further, if the architect has not been paid in full for work done to date, use for other than the purpose original intended is also prohibited without their consent or agreement (e.g. for renovations, additions, or alterations such as may arise during construction and be issued under Supplemental Instruction, Change Directive or Change Order).
  
  
• It is also noted that in some instances, such as Site Plan Approval, the AHJ may only accept full drawings, unlike the building department which will usually accept separate drawings with revisions; this may translate into considerable time and effort (costs) should another architect need to reproduce entire drawings. Such a situation may arise if permission to alter the drawings in question has not been agreed upon.
  
  
• It is the Architects Act that requires an architect to do the general review for any building designed by an architect. The Ontario Building Code [(OBC), under Section 1.2.2 General Review] also requires general review by an architect (which the Architects Act does not require an architect to design), however some building classifications do not require general review by an architect. These are, broadly speaking, projects that fall under Part 9 the OBC, 3 storeys or less in building height and less than 600 m2 in gross area. Ultimately the architect must either provide the appropriate service to an acceptable standard of the profession or not provide the service at all. Notify the chief building official in writing of their status in relation to the requirement for the general review of the construction to be undertaken by an architect
  
  
• An architect contemplating taking on another architect’s work should also consider the above as it pertains to copyright, scope of work, fees, risks, liability and possible professional misconduct if the change is conducted inappropriately (Refer to OAA Regulatory Notice RN.03 When a Client Changes Architects – General – Changes at Different Stages – Exposure to Liability.)
  
  
• With regard to the permit process roles and responsibilities, refer to OAA Practice Tip PT.08 Application for Building, Demolition or Conditional Permits - Architects Participation in the Permit Proc:
  

References:

OAA Regulatory Notice RN.06 General Review - Professional Standards for Building Code Related Matters
OAA Practice Tip PT.08 Application for Building, Demolition or Conditional Permits - Architects Participation in the Permit Process