Small Firm Exchange

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...

Seeking this group's and the firm's / the industry's position on something here:

We are trying to get some additional services on a large Single Family Residence.

I'm trying to make the main point to our client that we deserve additional compensation due to increased Budget. Our B105 Contract's "Initial Information" section defined the Anticipated/ desired budget at $3-4M. (also key to note that the client requested this number be put into the contract) The Current Budget estimate stands at $6.9M. Two other Contractor's preliminary numbers were roughly at / or way above this figure.

The  has said "I won't consider the ask if you can't find contract language that supports it".

I think I have found the Contract language I need:

Art. A.4 "initial Information":

"the anticipated budget for the Cost of the Work: Approximately $3-4M."

Article 6 Payments and Compensation to the Architect:

"At the request of the Owner, the Architect shall provide additional services not included in Article 1 for additional compensation.

Such additional compensation may include...revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget."

I think the keywords here are quality, and most importantly, budget. (We have already received a small Add Services for Scope (size) alignment.)

My language for the ask might go like this:

"Dear Clients:

1. Article A,4., defines the Anticipated budget as $3-4 million. (and this was a specific number that you requested be included in the Contract, not a swag by us). Refer to Article 6: "the Architect shall provide additional services listed in Article 1 for additional compensation. Such additional services may include....revisions due to changes in the Project scope, quality or budget". We have requested and been provided additional compensation due to increased scope (as measured in square footage). Our current budget estimate stands at $6.9m. This is clearly a change in budget, not an inflationary increase, not "one Contractors opinion" (as the other 2 GC estimates also were near or way above this opinion). Given three cost opinions, this is clearly a house with different quality than one with a $3-4m budget."

Thoughts? Supportable by our industry? Supportable if we would take him to court over it? (which we wouldn't)...