Unauthorized change by general contractor, recourse?

[rookiebuilder]

New here. Family members in process of having new home constructed by general contractor in Washington State. This is a custom home designed by/for the family and has both architectural and stamped/sealed structural engineering which was provided by the client to the general contractor. The contract says to build per plan.

First issue is: Appears framer did not follow the design and built incorrect garage wall heights (2 feet too tall). The design called for specific trusses which established the bonus room floor above and met the design intent for garage ceiling, bonus room floor and ceiling heights.

Second issue: The general must have (on his own) discovered the framing issue because they had a several week delay in framing. (Held for trusses they said). But after the trusses were delivered and installed, decking and roof sheathing applied....the general contacted the client and said: we have a problem with the stairs, they don't fit.

The family member (client) goes to look at house and discovers the upstairs floor is 2 feet higher than the plan, the bonus room ceilings are way too low (compressed) and that the truss design is completely different than the ones submitted with the stamped engineering. The date on the truss design is 6 months after the originals. There is no record of any approved design change at the county (required for structural changes to stamped designs) and the general contractor never contacted his client. He just had the truss design changed and thought nobody would notice.

Third issue: General seems to think he can find a way to adjust the stairs and everything is good. Client says no way.


In order to correct, the house needs a huge section torn down and rebuilt correctly. My view, the general owns this 100%, plus the framing contractor and even the truss company as the original engineering wasn't revised so how did they revise the truss design?

Suggestions on how to proceed from here?

 

[Mark K]

Hire a lawyer. Have the architect and the engineer document the differences. Do not make an effort to accommodate the work that did not comply with the original construction documents. Let the lawyer know that you want what you contracted for.

After consulting with the Lawyer consider filing a complaint with the State contractors licensing board. This will apply more pressure on the contractor.

 

[bill1952]

I agree with Mark on this one. You do need the architect and engineer on your side.

 

[jar546]

Hire a lawyer. Have the architect and the engineer document the differences. Do not make an effort to accommodate the work that did not comply with the original construction documents. Let the lawyer know that you want what you contracted for.

After consulting with the Lawyer consider filing a complaint with the State contractors licensing board. This will apply more pressure on the contractor.

This is the only answer you will need. Clear, and to the point. Do what Mark K recommended.

 

[ICE]

I never agree with Mark on anything. Your architect and engineer are already on board and now their role will expand. Give the contractors ten days to make it right. If they resist, then hire a lawyer. Unfortunately, the contractors attempted to hide the mistake and made it worse by sourcing substitute trusses. That would make it difficult to continue with them.

 

[bill1952]

Any idea if there was a performance bond? Rare on residential work but maybe.

 

[e hilton]

Tell the gc in writing that the work is not acceptable, does not agrre with approved plans, stop work immediately, no more payments … and hire a lawyer.

 

[bill1952]

I never agree with Mark on anything. Your architect and engineer are already on board and now their role will expand. Give the contractors ten days to make it right. If they resist, then hire a lawyer. Unfortunately, the contractors attempted to hide the mistake and made it worse by sourcing substitute trusses. That would make it difficult to continue with them.

In theory, a good plan. Works if you get paid by the hour, like building inspectors. The problem is unless you have an agreement to compensate the architect and engineers for this work they did not anticipate and probably not included in a lump sum fee, it will be hard for them to put in much time. I'd get the lawyer on board, and not wait 10 days.

 

[ICE]

In theory, a good plan. Works if you get paid by the hour, like building inspectors. The problem is unless you have an agreement to compensate the architect and engineers for this work they did not anticipate and probably not included in a lump sum fee, it will be hard for them to put in much time. I'd get the lawyer on board, and not wait 10 days.

Well let's assume that the client has the moxie to withhold his expense from a future invoice. Hiring a lawyer is a last resort move. Lawyers want front money with a hope that it will ever be forthcoming from the contractor. I've met so many contractors that are lawsuit proof that I wonder if there is another kind.

 

[e hilton]

. I'd get the lawyer on board, and not wait 10 days.

Most lawyers are not fluent in construction lingo, they will need a SME to point out exactly what is non compliant.

 

[bill1952]

withhold his expense from a future invoice

whose expense? contractor or architect?

The architect and engineer have every reason to resolve this quickly and expeditiously. Often not in the owner's best interest.

Most lawyers are not fluent in construction lingo

My lawyer clients are all very smart and I think can understand and see the building is not built per plans. And they do understand contracts and money, very well.