All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

It's a common mistake to think of architectural drawings as a product instead of an instrument of service. If an owner hires an architect to design a project, ownership, and copyright of those drawings belong to the architect. The client is granted use of the instruments of service for the specific project for a fee. This protects the architect/designer/engineer from having someone copy their plans without their consent, have it reproduced repeatedly, limits their liability and makes sure they get paid for their work. 

In this case, the buyer and his attorney want me to transfer all rights and ownership so that his architect can recreate the project. No part of the proposed design was advertised or implied to be transferred in the sale nor was it implied or explicit in the contract. 

I'll be making some calls tomorrow. 

The 250k was the accepted offer over asking in a competitive multi-offer scenario. It was offered as a turnkey duplex with the option to subdivide and build if a buyer was interested and wanted to take it on. I did not agree to convey the rights of my design with the property without written agreement and appropriate compensation. It wasn't part of the offer nor part of the negotiation. 

We used a standard CAR Income Property Purchase Agreement that requires mediation and both parties agreed to arbitration of disputes. It reads in in all caps that "you are giving up any rights you might possess to have the dispute litigated in a court or by jury trial" 

I feel like I'm in compliance with the contract and the buyer feels like I'm adding a lien or encumbrance by asking to be compensated for architectural drawings that were not included in the sale. The contract states that the seller is to deliver copies of plans, surveys, etc. which I have. It does not say convey all digital files and assign all intellectual property associated with the creation of the plans ... which is what his attorney is demanding under threat of 250k in damages. 

A sticky situation for sure not made any better with ultimatums and threats. Buyer messed up, made a lot of assumptions. Didn't get what he thought he was going to and decides to threaten the seller with legal action. We'll see what my attorney says on Monday. 

"You cant breach contract if it's not in the contract" 

Well said. Thank you.

Danny, 

Exactly. The buyers offered 250k over asking and claim it would cost them $133,700 to have my plans recreated. The damages would be for misrepresentation despite the buyer verbally telling me he did not regard the entitlements as part of his buying decision. 

Thanks for the reassurance gentlemen. I'm looking for a real estate litigation attorney if anyone knows a good one. It's curious they had the letter delivered on Friday at 5:00... The games have begun it would appear. 

I'm unlicensed architect, I sold a duplex with entitlements for a lot split and infill single-family. I created the construction documents for the proposed design but chose not to pursue development and sold the property instead. The design of the single-family was not part of the purchase and sale agreement for the property or advertised as such. As per the contract I delivered copies of all the drawings in my possession but did not release the rights to use them or agree to transfer the digital files. 

The contract was for the purchase and sale of the property and nowhere in the contract does it include assignment of intellectual property rights. I offered to cooperate with the buyer and share the drawings for a reasonable fee. 

Today, I received a letter from his attorney requesting I assign all intellectual property rights to my design or agree to damages ($250,000) or to mediation. 

So, who here has gone to mediation? From my perspective, the buyer would rather compensate their lawyer for my design than to compensate the designer. 

Happy Friday, thank you for your thoughts. 

@John G. I took your advice and let it be. So far so good, most stayed and lost one. That one needed to go anyhow. 

@Nathan Gesner I updated my minimum qualifications for approval/screening criteria and have a procedure for future applicants.  Thanks for the reply's gents.

M

Curious what the rule of thumb is on screening existing tenants. I currently have no background, credit checks or employment verification for 4 different inherited tenants. 

We're slowly repositioning the property from a D to a B, tenants we're used to really low rents and are scheduled for a second rent increase next month, everyone is month-to-month and have been consistent with payment for the past year. 

I'm almost through @Brandon Turner 's book on Managing Rental Properties and realizing I'm setting myself up for future problems if the tenants can't meet the 3x income minimum rental requirement. Which, I suspect at least two of them won't. 

So, do I hand everyone an application to renew tenancy and cut to the chase or wait it out? Pardon the semi-rhetorical question but do you issue a notice to terminate tenancy to a paying tenant on the assumption you're going to face problems down the road and swallow the cost of rehabbing a unit or two? or in other words, does the peace of mind in placing prescreened tenants into market-rate units outweigh to cost of an rehab and termination of tenancy. 

Thanks, 

Michael