I just completed working with an Attorney who used an agreement (from another major architectural society who will remain nameless) for the contract between one of my Clients and the GC (General Contractor).  I was aghast at what that contract software compelled my Client’s Attorney to do.  It mandated that he provide an affidavit complete with all of the text that was changed, in strikeout font, that he and I and our Client needed to have amended from the stock agreement, and it added this affidavit after the main agreement, itself.  In other words, several additional, confusing pages were added to this contract, after the contract itself.  To what purpose?  This makes no sense, and would only confuse both Client and Contractor. In contracts, ArCH has a main method: brevity, wherever possible. So, this other agreement from another organization wasn’t abiding by that philosophy.

I asked the Attorney to remove this silly and anal listing of all the text that was changed in the agreement.  Who needs to see all that goobledegook?  The Contractor is a competent licensed GC, who comes highly recommended from both a local Structural Engineer and a local Architect (he built the Architect’s house).  He is an easy-going country guy and would wonder what the heck we were trying to pull, if we provided this version of the contract to him, complete with everything that was changed.  So, my firm has requested that the Attorney please provide us with a PDF of the agreement without all that “stuff” in it.  He has agreed to do so.

I guess ArCH is going to have to create its own Client- GC agreement so that such shenanigans are no longer perpetrated on residential Architects, their Clients and their Contractors.   Okay: it is on the ArCH agenda.