signing documents

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1030 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 08:41 pm:    One of the intern architects in the office is concerned about signing pay applications and change orders since she is unlicensed. I say that since she is the "architect's representative" and working under the seal of the partner architect, that she can legally sign those documents. What say you? Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 364 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 09:38 pm:    What does your state licensing board say? Mark Gilligan SE, CSI Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 120 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 09:44 pm:    I don't believe that there is anything in the licenssing laws so she should not not be concerned that it is illegal. She might have some personal liability exposure if there were problems but I don't believe that this is something to worry excessively about. She is probably doubly safe since most young architects are not rich. It does not make sense to sue a poor person. The big potential liability is probably contractual. Because of the potential exxposure a senior architect should probably review these formss regardless of who signs them Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 945 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 08:05 am:    Isn't there a scenario where secretaries often sign letters, etc for their bosses by signing their names in the space above the bosses name and then add "per" to indicate that this was done at the boss's direction-- example Sincerely, Judy Doe [signature] per [in cursive] Fred W. Browne John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1008 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 08:45 am:    I have signed hundreds of these in my career and don't believe that there should be a problem. (I'm not licensed.) In my positions doing CA, my employer, and the individual who sealed the drawings, understood and expected that I would be signing the pay apps as part of my duties. J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 307 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 10:50 am:    I would argue that if the architect's seal is attached, that the sealing individual should be signing. I believe this is the case with the "Certificate of Payment" (what the pay app becomes once it is signed by an architect). This procedure is outlined in AIA A 201. It is my understanding that many administrative assistance become very adept at... well, we won't go there. I once worked in a branch office some 1500 miles from the home office. There was not an architect in the office authorized to sign for the firm (there were several registered/licensed architects working on site). And yet, sealed construction documents were regularly issued; I would go home at 5:30pm and at 8:30am they would have been signed and sealed by a principal from the home office. How he managed to get from one place to another and back in a little more than 12 hours; maybe Santa does exist. Russ Hinkle, AIA, CCS Senior Member Username: rhinkle Post Number: 58 Registered: 02-2006 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 11:21 am:    We had this discussion in our office a few years back. Even asked the lawyers. Change Orders are modifications to the contract documents and therefore should be signed by the architect who sealed the original drawings. Payment applications are not part of the contract documents and can then be signed by anyone designated to do such. Basically you need someone the firms trusts with that responsiblity and someone the owner will accept. In fact in our office these were regularly sign by those who were not RA's but rather those assigned to field work. That was the conclusion of our discussion. Nathan Woods, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 281 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 11:25 am:    In every firm I've worked for, on most private projects, unlicensed staff regularly sign documents such as PayAps. However, some projects (public school projects come to mind), they want documents to be signed "by the Architect in general responsible charge of the project". On those types of projects, only the principal architect that stamped and signed the plans will sign the payaps, change orders, etc.... So I don't see any issues neccessarily in having staff sign documents such as that. However, the use of the word Intern gives me concern. I think I would only have "regular staff" takign on such responsiblities. Anonymous   Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 11:39 am:    My contention is that if the licensing laws were consistently enforced it would result in significant changes in how architecture and engineering offices were organized and how individuals were compensated. If documents needed to be signed by those actually doing the work those individuals would expect more money and possibly say. Delivery of documents would be delayed if the signing individual is out of the office. It would be harder for branch offices to do work outside of their normal area unless the local principles are registered to practice at the location of the project. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1010 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 02:06 pm:    Nathan; I think the word "intern" as used in this thread should be construed to be consistent with the term used in the profession. That is, the individual is "regular staff" but has not yet become registered. Intern does not really mean "summer help." David can confirm if this is what he meant. David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1031 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 02:39 pm:    When I said "Intern" I meant unlicensed architect.