anyone?

@et2020 who did the drawings?

I did?

@et2020 I checked your earlier post and I see that you're a part 1 student.

All drawings done by part 1, part 2 or those studying part 3 are supposed to be checked by a qualified architect before being sent on site.

Did someone, for example your supervisor, checked the drawings before sending them on?

I have no clue . You give them a set of drawings for them to check , whether they check them or not is another matter

Posted by: @et2020

On the last site visit the windows had been fitted but the lead architect is adamant that they should have been sash and is not happy . The client is happy with what has been fitted and willing to proceed .

Hello,

If the client is happy with what was fitted why is this an issue?

Regards,

J. White

Because the lead architect insists that sashes are more durable

Posted by: @et2020

Because the lead architect insists that sashes are more durable

If the client has no problem with the windows and its just something the architect wants then its all about who is going to pay for this?

That's the main problem, yes

Posted by: @et2020

That's the main problem, yes

Generally, it is accepted that written text takes precedence over drawings https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Construction_drawing

Specifications will detail the materials, standards, techniques, and so on required to carry out the works. Construction drawings provide the graphical representation, indicating the arrangement of components, detailing, dimensions and so on. They may sometimes contain some of the information set out in specifications, but this should be avoided if possible, by referring to specifications rather than duplicating information. Where there is crossover, care must be taken to ensure proper co-ordination so there is no confusion. If there is disparity between the two, the specifications will tend to take precedence over the drawings. 

So it seems pretty cut and dried to me.

Yes but the contractor did not raise it with us either

I'd like to step in and offer my 2p. I've done contracting work for 20yrs and we always work off the specs.

Tbh would be a pita to work with drawings.

Cheers
Rick

Hello @ET2020

It is clear that there is a discrepancy between what the drawings and what the specifications say. Now, in an ideal world, everyone would make sure to read all documentation prior to signing it off, but that is not always the case.

In this instance it seems apparent that the architect team sent off a set of conflicting instructions which were then executed by the contractor. The issue of discrepancy was not raised until it was too late. At every step of the way somebody should have picked up the conflicting set of documents and yet nobody did.

I concur with Jane and Rick in that specifications are generally understood to take priority over drawings. Popular standard contracts such as NEC or JCT do not have clauses dealing with order of precedence, although they can be added in an amendment as backstop.

In general, for problems such as these I refer to the Architect’s Legal Handbook. For example the JCT section that talks about discrepancies says

Clauses 2.13 to 2.20 deal with errors, discrepancies and divergences in and between the contract and related documents, and require the contractor to report a number of such occurrences to the Architect, who is required to issue instructions to resolve the difficulty. In general, the cost involved is borne by the party responsible for the preparation of the document in question.

The paragraph above makes it clear that any liability sits with whomever prepared the documents. But it could also be argued that there is a shared responsibility between the parties as the contractor did not raise the discrepancy, although I have a feeling if a judgment were to be handed down it would be not be in favour of the lead architect.

This situation comes down to whether this can be resolved amicably or not. The most obvious resolution was suggested by @jwhite and would be to try and persuade the lead architect that because the client has no problem with what was fitted, and unless there is some other element to the story that we are not aware of, the matter should be considered closed.