Is it really now time to consider restriction of service??

Is it really now time to consider restriction of service??

Postby spoilsport » Tue Jan 11, 2011 4:36 pm

I know there was similar topics posted on this a while ago, but after opening the office last week, I had quite a run in enquiries, about work, mainly small stuff, extensions, conversions, the odd DAC / and retention app. They would have kept the wolf from the door for another wee while. I really thought the New Year was beginning to start with a bang, and I kept the quotes as keen as I could, barr buying the work. Well to cut a long story short, on every quote, I was hammered to the ground, not by other practices; either registered architects, or grandfathers, but by unemployed, on the sick, back bedroom plan drawers nixers. Now! I accept that these services were always part and parcel of the game, I have done them myself when an undergraduate for family and friends.

But the main point area to look at, can architectural services be restricted. I’m not advocating that it be restricted to BCA registered architects, so please all grandfathers, engineers, techies, and surveyors, don’t start having a go!! Should it be restricted to all the parties mentioned, so long as they are registered, for tax, vat, have PI, and at least we are all starting from a similar standing in regard to overheads, and other costs.

Of course, if I was on the brew, and doing the work for beer tokens at the weekend, then I could certainly compete with the the other nixers, but I don’t want to even consider that route. I have cut my cloth to suit my means over 18month ago from a 5 person practice to me, and a part time tech..,

The restriction of title is only a sideshow at this stage, as it has not restricted service, and with smaller firms like mine chasing all the small jobs, alongside the nixers. I will also state that during the boom years our firm never turned away these small bread n butter jobs, in search of the higher prestige jobs,, and always kept the hand in.

But can the restriction of services ever be achieved ?, without it being construed as a restriction to civil liberty. I know that service restriction is a long-term goal of the brotherhood Masters in Merrion, but only after the title shenanigans if ever is finally put to bed once and for all. As mentioned above I would never advocate restriction to RIAI only, and would resist such a move, because I know personally a large number of legitimate firms, that are not registered architects as per BCA, but are at least employing people, paying tax, vat, have PI cover and providing competent and affordable service to their community. I can compete with them in regard to price, but not the latter group.

If restriction of service was mooted, however, how would it be implemented fairly, be governed, and would it indeed work in a post boom society that were are now in, all food for thought. It certainly would not work if overseen by Merrion, as they would cock it up, as sure as night follows day. Would it work if Local Authorities only accepted plans, from Revenue endorsed practices?? Would the nixers, just stop putting their name on the plans, and then just use their client’s name, to imply they designed their own work??

Lets set up this hypothetical scenario, and see where it goes?


spoilsport

PS- hey Paul - How does one upload an avatar???
User avatar
spoilsport
Member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Tue Jan 11, 2011 6:49 pm

spoilsport,

This is a reflection of my own experience and I have defended the position of asking for a fair fee for reasoanble work on the basis that if you're a professional and work as an architect for a living, then you need the small work too - especially if you're a small office - and each job has to pay.

I've experienced what you have over the past two years - competing against incompetent draughtsman, engineers with no design ability and technicians who aren't much better.

Recently I've fought the architect's corner over on askaboutmoney.com where some guy had factored in €500 to design and lodge a new house and another poster called RIAD_BSC was cheerleading.

Planning Costs
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=149146

When I pointed out that this amounted to below cost selling he responded with the free market mantra, which argument extended over two threads.

This one, which I started; -

Architects Fees - a Race to the bottom on Price and Quality.
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=149255

And this one, started by RIAD_BSC which is still ongoing as you can see; -

Some architects (and other professionals) think the world owes them a living
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=149271

You have to be careful when you explain the world of professionals with academic qualifications to some people.
They don't have a clue how pensions, total gross earning, family life all are negatively effected by spending your twenties in college and learning your professional practice.
Its convenient for them not to acknowledge the economic redress professionals feel entitled to.
And of course they don't accept that a higher standard of design and knowledge should be adequately rewarded.
They're just interested in screwing the profession at the moment with no thought for how this might rebound on them and others.

I have a report to write for Thursday so I doubt I will reply to RIAD_BSC, but I throw it open here if any competent professional designers would like to drop in and have a go - read the posting rules and keep it polite but firm, never abusive.

------------------------

To answer your question, this has been covered in the Other Thread about the Building Control Act 2007 and the Sensitive Issue of the Title Architect.

I have given a lot of though to this off-line and there appears to be a very straightforward solution:
- let each profession stick to what its competent at.

This goes back to the Safety Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and the attendant regulations.
If someone wants to lodge permissions that's one thing, but to design the house they better be trained as an architect.
We're the ones who do five years of design training, not engineers, technicians or draughtspeople.
There is still room for those who have achieved excellence in the design of their work without specific design training.
Let them stand up and apply to be registered as architects.
Otherwise, head off into the sunset and don't come back.

The issue is design competence, not whether you can fill out a form and organise six copies of plans and red outlinline an OS Map with the position of a site notice on it and showing your land holdings coloured blue and ROW's coloured yellow.

The issue is the design of the built environment, whether a private house or a multi-storey office block - is the person competent to design them.

Nixer-merchant draughtspeople, engineers and most technicians haven't a design bone in their bodies.
Those that do need to study as architects, qualify and get registered or get assessed through the ARAE or perhaps the new BCB 2010 if it becomes law.

------------------------

Two other criteria - and the long term technie and Granfather will love these, are:

(i) are they 10 years in business providing services commensurate with those of an architect - show proof
(ii) are they fully covered by PI cover and if so - as what?
(iii) are they paying V.A.T.T and tax - report them!

That should batten down the hatches - but you're totally right spoilsport - feck these part time nixer merchants!

I believe the RIAI question is - is a schoolteacher who lodges one house application a year an architect?
These are the gits who are taking away out livelihood, not to make ends meet, as we are, but to line their pockets.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby missarchi » Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:30 pm

Is the teachers union to blame?
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:28 am

I think we need an architect's union.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby missarchi » Wed Jan 12, 2011 7:10 am

onq wrote:I think we need an architect's union.

ONQ.


Ireland does not have any standards for indigenous architecture how can you expect an architects union?
Irish architects/teks seem to be lost in banksitekure and eurmodernism.

The solution is simple a building/architecture bank all transactions/contracts must go though the bank for works over 100,000.
Irish architects do not have there own currency, bank,laws, tax system...

If you think anything will change your kidding yourself...
Architects serve teachers then clients.
Architects are rarely allowed to set the curriculum for society they just groom it.
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby Morlan » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:08 pm

spoilsport wrote:How does one upload an avatar???


ucp.php?i=profile&mode=avatar
User avatar
Morlan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 831
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:47 pm
Location: Áth Cliath

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby spoilsport » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:23 pm

I’m not really wanting to get into the argument of RIAI v Grandfathers, Engineers, Surveyors, Arch Techies. That topic has been flogged to death on the " BCA title" topic, and has been going around in circles for a long time now.

My main point is not to disenfranchise established "Architectural Services" firms, but to push the nixer merchant from competing with legitimate tax / wage paying firms. I agree with ONQ on some points, but if one tried to restrict service, to RIAI / Architect Grads, only we will only find a much larger & bona fide resistance lobby group, from the IEI, SCS/RICS, CIOB, and professional bodies representing members whom all would have members which run "Architectural Services / Design Consultancy" firms or otherwise. It would tie up any attempt for change into knots for years, if not collapse it all together ..

The Black market is now severely affecting my livelihood, because were are all now chasing the same small works, because that is all that is on the table at the moment.

I'm looking for valid, reasonable common sense suggestions, of how such a scenario could be properly implemented, because when the politician begin their campaign trail soon, I will be pitching this scenario to them. It needs to simple, because otherwise the politicians will not grasp the nettle. Unless the nixers set up a nixer union, and lobby for them to retain the supplying of tax free /cash paid services, I do not think there will be any resistance to the concept, providing that restriction of service is available to all business registered / tax paying PI carrying firms.

Our firm carries out site assessments, in which we are on a number of local authority lists, which will only accept assessments, from those firms/persons on the list, and ensure we all have carried out the fetac/fas course (irrespective of any existing qualifications) and carry €1 mill.. of PI cover . Before that everyman and his pet dog were doing such assessments. If local Authorities were to only accept planning applications, from only tax registered and PI covered firms, it would cut the nixers out of the equation would it not ? , but of course that all needs legislation to enact such changes.

As profusely mentioned before I would certainly not advocate restricting service to RIAI only, as to try to do would end up in certain defeat. All we need at this stage is to ensure that we are all starting off on equal footing, in a business sense
(the qualifications argument is not relevant at this point) because if one is a serious legitimate business, our overheads are / should be similar on many points.

I would like to see this concept teased out to see if it is worth a pitch at all the eager political hounds that will be surely baying at our doors for our votai, within the next few months if not sooner.


spoilsport
User avatar
spoilsport
Member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby teak » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:58 pm

Follow the course (online or however)of the applications and schemes that you were cut out of.
I bet it will happen in most planning applications that the piss-artist will overplay his hand and
get slapped back by the planners.
Planners don't like amateur/DIY applications either and usually go looking for faults in them.
Those that do go through planning will often run into actual building hitches.
All this costs the cheap-minded clients that very money they tried to save.
And also costs the nixer-boy the fame he'd dreamed of.

When the next bargain-hunting client comes to you explain the pitfalls of going cheap on design
or planning application submission.
For now you just have to be philosophical about this.
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby DOC » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:08 pm

I have to agree wholeheartedly with Spoilsport.

Very dis-heartening when you find out you've lost out on a very small domestic job (> E100K) to an architect (and it was an architect - most likely the back-bedroom/unemployed type) charging 2.5% for full architectural service from start to finish including planning! Either the architect is not really going to provide a full service or they are working for minimum wage.

In one way I am lucky to be in practice since 2001 so I have a catalogue of work behind me and word of mouth is the only way I am getting jobs.

I have heard of one instance where an insurance company withdrew PI insurance from an architectural firm as they got wind of the fee they were charging for a particular project and felt the fee being charged was simply insufficient to provide a reasonable level of service/detailing/site inspection.
DOC
Member
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 12:57 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby goneill » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:15 pm

Now, theres an idea. There are a limited number of insurers. Legit architects make up a substantial number of their clients. Maybe representatives of groups of those clients, for example RIAI members in the case of RIAI Insurance Services, (only a broker I think, but still influential) should say that we as clients charging reasonable fees are not happy if they insure those who are charging ridiculously low fees. It would have to carefully thought out so as not to offend the Competetition Authority, but we may be, after all, taking the financial hit through increased premiums for those whose mistakes are caused by insufficient time spent on a project and whose fees are consequently lower. Through our insurance premiums we are subsidisng some of those guys already.

All this assumes that the people who spend very little time on a project are producing an inferior product, but as we know from Ryanair that is not necessarily the case. The insurance companies would have a very good idea from the fees/building value ratios declared on proposal forms
goneill
Member
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:36 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby wearnicehats » Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:07 pm

umm, there's nothing to say that otherwise employed RIAI registered architects aren't allowed to do private work is there?
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 823
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby PVC King » Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:26 pm

goneill wrote: Maybe representatives of groups of those clients, for example RIAI members in the case of RIAI Insurance Services, (only a broker I think, but still influential) should say that we as clients charging reasonable fees are not happy if they insure those who are charging ridiculously low fees.



The real problem here is that those that undercut to such an extent that they can't resource the instruction are often those who don't have insurance at all or such cheap insurance that the exclusions are so wide that sustaining a claim is near impossible.

There is no question that the 'Grandfather Act' is a complete dogs dinner; the sooner a workable system is enacted to ensure that the various levels from F to A are recognised and that it is required to gain and maintain membership of a body that checks essential items like insurance, CPD and client accounts the better.

To go from near zero regulation to an exclusive regime but letting a number of people through the gate with little or no checks was farcical and has clearly annoyed everyone from those with graduate qualifications through to those who completed their training through RIAI; I really hope this issue can be put back on the agenda into the next Dail.


there's nothing to say that otherwise employed RIAI registered architects aren't allowed to do private work is there
PVC King
 

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby DOC » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:38 pm

Have to agree with PVC King on that suggestion - the problem being that many do not have PI.

The nub of the issue is essentially too many architects - too little work. Simple as. Hopefully at some stage a better balance (of work to architects) will be reached.

At an RIAI conference (the year before last I think), in talking about the current recession and future opportunities for architects, the RIAI presented a table of architects per 1000 of population for the EU. Ireland was still way down on the list (despite there now being 5 schools of architecture lashing out graduates). As spoilsport alludes to, maybe the public need to be better educated/informed as why they should use a registered architect/practice rather than the cheap option?

I could also suggest a cull of all architects under the age of 38 should help matters. :-)
DOC
Member
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 12:57 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:26 pm

Technicians, by their own estimate on boards.ie [correct me if I'm wrong Doc] 25% of them are interested in becoming architects.
In terms of design perhaps ten per cent of them have the ability in my experience.

I don't agree with this hands off attitude to engineers, surveyors or technicians muscling in on our design work.
If they want to design buildings they should go off and attend a full time course that imports the requisite skills and knowledge.
Past time to stop pussy-footing around.

As for Architectural Technologists - what design content is in that extra year that confers on Technicians the ability to design like Architects with a five year full time course behind them?

Finally, the figures you refer to for Ireland's architects fail to take account of the fact that people other than architects are taking the work away from us - the figures are apples and oranges, so its not a level playing field.
Is a school teacher competent to design a building, or a draughtsman, or a structural engineer?
Where have they learnt this competence?

Suggesting non-archtiects can supply architectural services is a nonsense for the convenience of those who have been taking the work out of our mouths for years.
In clearing the underbrush of competitors the RIAI have chosen soft targets and they didn't even do that well.]
There needs to be a lot of changes in this state in relation to the provision of architectural services.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:31 pm

PVC King wrote:
goneill wrote: Maybe representatives of groups of those clients, for example RIAI members in the case of RIAI Insurance Services, (only a broker I think, but still influential) should say that we as clients charging reasonable fees are not happy if they insure those who are charging ridiculously low fees.



The real problem here is that those that undercut to such an extent that they can't resource the instruction are often those who don't have insurance at all or such cheap insurance that the exclusions are so wide that sustaining a claim is near impossible.

There is no question that the 'Grandfather Act' is a complete dogs dinner; the sooner a workable system is enacted to ensure that the various levels from F to A are recognised and that it is required to gain and maintain membership of a body that checks essential items like insurance, CPD and client accounts the better.

To go from near zero regulation to an exclusive regime but letting a number of people through the gate with little or no checks was farcical and has clearly annoyed everyone from those with graduate qualifications through to those who completed their training through RIAI; I really hope this issue can be put back on the agenda into the next Dail.


there's nothing to say that otherwise employed RIAI registered architects aren't allowed to do private work is there


Not half as much as becoming disenfranchised by the RIAI annoyed me.
As for the Bill - its due to come before the Cabinet next month I believe.
Your characterisation of it as a dog's dinner is short sighted as shown below.
All Grandfathers have to do is refrain from using the Title and carry on regardless.
Once they are registered however, they will be subject to the PPC and the rigours of the Code.

I'm surprised someone like you missed this obvious benefit to the public.
Now they are unregulated - after registration they won't be...

ONQ.
Last edited by onq on Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:35 pm

wearnicehats wrote:umm, there's nothing to say that otherwise employed RIAI registered architects aren't allowed to do private work is there?


No there isn't .

This will allow below cost selling and predatory pricing.
There was evidence of this sort of practice going on in 2009 and 2010
Offices with a line of credit available or accumulated profits were offering to do work for zero fees.

I'm not sure that's legal in the EU.
It certainly doesn't support the standards in the profession.
It fails to ensure an adequate level of funding to competently process a design from inception to completion.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:41 pm

missarchi wrote:
onq wrote:I think we need an architect's union.

ONQ.


Ireland does not have any standards for indigenous architecture how can you expect an architects union?
Irish architects/teks seem to be lost in banksitekure and eurmodernism.

The solution is simple a building/architecture bank all transactions/contracts must go though the bank for works over 100,000.
Irish architects do not have there own currency, bank,laws, tax system...

If you think anything will change your kidding yourself...
Architects serve teachers then clients.
Architects are rarely allowed to set the curriculum for society they just groom it.


Something about this post isn't scanning properly .
Are you posting while tired and emotional or just plain tired?

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby teak » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:49 pm

I'm a bit confused by exactly who these undercutters are and why you seem so powerless with them.

Are they just cowboys ?
If so, then "quality" of their work will find them out whatever about insurance.

Are they real (but officially unemployed) architects/arch techs who are ghost-writing designs and planning applications for clients who pay them in cash ?
If so, then the discussions with the client's discussions with the planners will show that the man presenting the application is not the man who really designed it -- he simply will not be au fait with the design detail jargon, planning regulations, etc. . Smart planners would see through this and give the client a hard time with his application. The additional work and time redoing the application & design will make it unworthwhile to the moonlighter if he's on a fixed fee; and on the client if he's on a pay per hour of work done basis.

Are they double jobbers who work for a private firm of architects by day and themselves by night ?
Surely there must be a "restraint of competition" clause on the employer firm's contract of employment with the moonlighting architect. If you know the culprit, then report him to his boss.

Are they double jobbers who (à la Philip Sheedy) have a public sector architect job by day and work for themselves in the evenings & weekends ?
Here there may be no "restraint of competition" clause as the types of work undertaken in the public sector job and the nixers are not in the same class.
All I can say about this case is that if one of the cheap moonlighter's professional colleagues finds out about him, he /she ought do the right thing and contact the council/corporation/govt agency straight off and demand that they insist on their own prerogative on his publicly-funded facilities and energies. If they demur, threaten to leak it to the Irish tabloid press. Let the cheapy be the one to moan off to the RIAI if he wants. . .
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby wearnicehats » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:41 am

onq wrote:
wearnicehats wrote:umm, there's nothing to say that otherwise employed RIAI registered architects aren't allowed to do private work is there?


No there isn't .

This will allow below cost selling and predatory pricing.
There was evidence of this sort of practice going on in 2009 and 2010
Offices with a line of credit available or accumulated profits were offering to do work for zero fees.

I'm not sure that's legal in the EU.
It certainly doesn't support the standards in the profession.
It fails to ensure an adequate level of funding to competently process a design from inception to completion.

ONQ.


I think I'm missing something here


Despite a long standing adamancy that a nixer would never pass my threshold I have recently done 2 or 3 for one reason or another. I did 2 pro bono because I needed their own particular professional expertise in return but I did charge for the 3rd. Now the fee is irrelevant save to say that they got a good product at a fair price (as did the others for that matter). And I believe I got a fair service in return


Now that's not predatory pricing or below cost selling. It's not illegal. It's no different to the word of mouth mentioned previously. It was done in my own time outside of my own office. Letters of appointment were signed as were fee agreements as were reciprocal agreements in kind. PI was and remains in place. Everyone got a good and full service and we all walked away happy. And all of it on my own personal drawing sheets with my own RIAI number at the bottom. Certainly nothing illegal or substandard. There actually is a lot to be said for the professional barter system if done properly.

I am concerned that the tone of this thread is such that small scale work should be limited to small scale practices or that extensions are the pre-requisite of the sole practitioner. They really aren't. there is no easy solution here - it's the registration issue again - are you all channelling CK?
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 823
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby parka » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:08 pm

DOC wrote:Have to agree with PVC King on that suggestion - the problem being that many do not have PI.


I've spoken to a few Architects who still have no PI, even after hearing a few horror stories they don't really seem to care.


DOC wrote:I could also suggest a cull of all architects under the age of 38 should help matters. :-)


Most of those are in Australia ; )
parka
Member
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:10 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby spoilsport » Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:10 pm

In my personal circumstances, in regard to the last 4 small contracts, in which I was outquoted, the circumstances were as follows :

1] One off urban dwelling €150-200k max - it was won out by a former council draughtsman, whom has been retired off from the council for health reasons over the last 20 years, and has been on the social sick benefit since AFAIK, but not sick enough to restrict his offering of architectural services since his untimely retirement. He just does the planning for clients, cash only at all times, carries no PI, but has cut a deal with a local Engineer to sign off on mortgage stage payments and issue final cert of compliance. This particular chap, must have still friends in the planning office, because his name rarely is shown when checking the agents list online, when inspecting his planning applications. Quite handy if revenue was doing a quick flit through eh!!

2] Retention application : this was won by a local college lecturer, (all cash only deal) , in some construction related subject, and carries no PI but most importantly he just happens to be the brother of one the most senior executive planners in his own local authority. enough said..

3] DAC application - This was won by an unemployed architectural technician - cad monkey, whom continuously advertises his wares through a local dealer mag.

4] 2 bedroom - ensuite extension to existing townhouse - this was won by a fully fledged part 2 brethren architect, made unemployed around 9-10months ago by a large practice that has went from 19 staff to the 3 principle directors.. again cash job, no PI cover, planning drawings only, no tender docs. Word of mouth referral. Hit and run .. thank you


Now this gives a good list , of the characters I, and all other legit firms are competing against. All the clients care about is the bottom line in costs. i have explained to them in detail the cons of such routes, and I have received the sympathy vote, but in the end most if not all these clients go with the considerably cheaper option. Can I really blame them.. No I cant !! we have all been in the position where we have gone and purchased the really cheap option, and regretted it later, whether it was a car, tv, clothes or otherwise, with the very odd experience that the product ended up actually good value for money, but in the end most of the time it turned out to absolute crap!! but you cannot instil this to clients, whom are usually using their own funds on the project because the banks are not lending. Human nature being what it is , will tend on average to take the cheaper option, especially in these troubled times. I always think of that scene in the film Armageddon, where they are in the shuttle flying towards the comet, when one of the characters quips, about sitting there, upon thousands of gallons of liquid oxygen, on a rocket built for NASA, by the lowest bidder.


Again if my firm was in the open market, and tendering for contracts, against only legit architectural firms, including grandfathers / engineers / surveyors as long as they are tax/vat PI covered firms( ONQ - Im not going down that route of advocating only RIAI / grads - that dog has been well kicked around the block at this stage & Im bored with it at this stage) I know I could compete. The market would then find a balance. Can a workable formulae be put forward and lobbied to the politicians when they come knocking.?? If nothing else it might bring some of the black marketers, into our world, of paying their dues to society, and then we will see if they could hack in, by working legit..


spoilsport
User avatar
spoilsport
Member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby teak » Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:10 pm

Excellent intelligence data.
I see you've retained your good humour at any rate.

Case 1.
This guy is on the sick since 1990 and still capable of "winning" €150k - €200k jobs ?
That means his fees are substantial. And his celtic tiger savings even more so.
You have to gather your guts and report him. No warning.

Case 2.
A prickly thistle.
Monitor his jobs.

Case 3.
A small job and maybe not worth the hassle of defence measures.

Case 4.
This guy is actually your biggest threat.
Has the design skill by training. And rock bottom prices.
He's liable to take everything you'd otherwise get.
Rather than attack this individual, it might make an interesting case-study
if you propose going looking for official sanction against such people.
His behaviour shows the real horror of the building boom induced cannibalisation
now prevalent.

Buona fortuna.
teak
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby parka » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:16 pm

I would see the guy who advertises his services as the bigger threat.

Seen and heard it all before.
parka
Member
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:10 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby wearnicehats » Fri Jan 14, 2011 7:56 pm

teak wrote:A small job and maybe not worth the hassle of defence measures.

Case 4.
This guy is actually your biggest threat.
Has the design skill by training. And rock bottom prices.
He's liable to take everything you'd otherwise get.
Rather than attack this individual, it might make an interesting case-study
if you propose going looking for official sanction against such people.
His behaviour shows the real horror of the building boom induced cannibalisation
now prevalent.

.


assuming this person is registered, what exactly do you see them as having done wrong?
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 823
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Is it really now time to consider restriction of service

Postby onq » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:05 pm

Not paying tax - obviously.

And this is the way to deal with all of these smart arses.

Report the lot of them to the Revenue Commissions and report the one in the Council to the County Manager.

Stop pussy footing around with these clowns.

Time to act.


ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Next

Return to Ireland



cron