Looks like you got only a proposal (Quote). Signing the contract is to follow after you agree on the details.

Not all architects agree to the "Not to exceed" clause, I have no record of the percentage of architects that agree to that, but it is pretty common in my area.

I would understand you wanting to have the option of breaking the contract at any time...but paying whatever amount you have in your mind is unfair. You should pay the amount of hours invested in your project because that is the right thing to do. If you do not trust the architect, then you should keep looking.

I just don't want any ambiguity. The proposal is broken down into phases, not hours. And what happens if we get through only a portion of Phase 1 and then we have to move or find out we can't build or have a falling-out with the architect? Do we pay for the entire phase? What portion of the phase do we pay for? What if something happens on Day 2, and they haven't even done services to cover the amount of the down payment?

I do trust him right now; otherwise I would not be considering this. However, I am quite sure that most if not all arrangements start out friendly. Who, after all, would actually hire someone they didn't like or didn't trust? But I have also experienced building relationships that have gone very wrong for one reason or another. And I want to be able to walk away amicably and confidently, for both of us.

I am not trying to stiff anyone for work completed, but I want to be able to get out of the contract if something does occur, and not end up owing the full amount or some ambiguous fee for ambiguous services.

The "not to exceed" clause was his idea, which makes me think this will be the only "contract." It also vaguely outlines a scope of work, listing what style we want and a few of the ideas we want to incorporate in the house, but certainly not all of what I would consider to be in our Program.

For a small project, a written proposal can become a contract if there is a place for both parties to sign.

But all of the issues you mentioned and many more should be included in order to protect the interests of both parties. Another contract might be signed based on the proposal but it would be appropriate to explain that in the proposal and perhaps attach a blank copy of it.

You said the fees were included so I guess they were hourly rates with no upset limit. Usually an architect will only give a fixed fee or fee limit if the scope of the work is known and that is often not the case for a house design. Often a better approach is to use an hourly rate with a budget until the preliminary design is competed and then negotiate a fixed fee or fee limit.

A typical termination clause says that either party can terminate the with a 7 day written notice and all fees due at that time will be paid.

Ownership of the drawings and the responsibilities and duties of each party should also be included in the contract.

Thank you, Renovator8. It is a fixed fee, broken down into 3 phases, each with a lump sum. Hourly charges are only listed for "additional services" which includes change orders, revisions after approval, changes to the scope, fault of contractor, etc. What does "upset limit" mean?

Often a better approach is to use an hourly rate with a budget until the preliminary design is competed and then negotiate a fixed fee or fee limit. I like this. This is a good idea and sounds like what we should propose to get started.

I like your termination clause also. The proposal does state that they own the drawings, and that they cannot be used for any other project but ours. Which I think is good.

The 4 common fee types are fixed hourly rate with no limit, fixed hourly rate with a limit (upset limit), fixed lump sum fee and % of construction cost.

An upset limit is the same as "not to exceed". It is used with hourly billing. If you have a fixed fee you already have a fee limit.

Apparently the proposal is for a lump sum fee divided into phases.

I would think that if the contract was terminated you would be required to pay the portion of the fixed fee that had been completed for that phase of the design.

The link below is for a standard AIA Owner-Architect Agreement for a house. Your architect should be familiar with it. The form is not enough IMO but it is a good place to start. He can buy the form in paper form or online and strike out or add whatever the two of you agree to. Often attachments (like the original proposal) are referenced in the Agreement form and attached to it. It is a good idea to list in detail what services are included and what are not included. Important services like structural design, zoning appeals, models, perspectives, landscape design, surveys, reimbursable expenses, and consultants should be addressed. If you are not going to use a lawyer it is best to at least start with an AIA form and modify it.

Services during the construction phase should be carefully described. I will not agree to a contract that does not include on site observation but administration of the contract is usually unnecessary.

As for ownership of drawings, I would not want my client to build more than one house or sell the drawings or restrict my use of them later but I would not want to deny my client the use of the incomplete drawings to complete the project if the contract was terminated. Anyway it has never been an issue for me in 40 years. Perhaps a one time use could be guaranteed even if the contract is terminated.

Here is a link that might be useful: B105