ProNetwork News

On September 18, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted the final rule under the Dodd-Frank Act regarding the registration of municipal advisors.  The new rules were published in the Federal Register and became effective on November 20, 2013.  This article will provide a general discussion of how the Dodd-Frank Act and the final rules may impact engineers and other design professionals providing services to non-federal governmental clients.  You should seek legal advice for your specific situation as this article only provides general information and is not intended to provide legal advice or interpretation of the Act for particular situations.

This article reviews some of the issues addressed in a standard Owner/Design Professional Agreement, outlines concerns from the Design Professional’s perspective, and discusses how the Design Professional can reduce liability on a project and ensure equitable adjustments to the contract price and schedule for changed or additional design services. The agreement contemplated by this article is one to be used as part of a traditional design-bid-build approach.

When your office receives a request for qualifications (RFQ) or a request for proposal (RFP), do you immediately hear “Get the project descriptions! Who has the resumes? Show them how great we are…we have done hundreds of these projects. Get on it!” This represents the proposal preparation process for most firms. However, this approach may inhibit a firm’s objective: to attract clients and increase their loyalty to the firm. In turn, the common approach may actually interfere with rather than promote selection for a project! The assertion that qualifications and experience earn projects is a myth.

Recent court decisions and increasingly onerous client demands are creating substantial insurance related difficulties for design firms. This article will focus on the potentially hazardous and surprising consequences of adding clients and others as additional insureds to the A/E’s general liability insurance (CGL) policy(s). A recent Illinois Appellate Court Decision illustrates this threat:  Patrick Engineering Inc. (Patrick) v. Old Republic General Insurance Co (Old Republic). The basic facts are:

No engineering project is without risk. Somewhere between the goal of designing the best bridge, building or water treatment facility and running a profitable business lurks the ever present possibility of litigation. A legitimate disagreement can occur, a company can make a mistake, or a firm or government entity—or a member of the public—can file a lawsuit that forces the firm to defend itself and its work. “A lot of risks exist and they’r e not necessarily related to the quality of the work performed,” says John Moossazadeh, a senior vice president at Kleinfelder in San Diego.