Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: California contract law

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Ah, interesting...but that is why I did say "may" as I do realize that
different strokes for different states...I thought there was a chance that
what works in Michigan may not work in California.

Thanks for the information.

Scott
Adrian, MI


On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 bcainse(--nospam--at)aol.com wrote:

> Sorry Scott, but in California, requests for AG opinions are limited to designated public officials (the Legilsators, the Governor, state officals, etc.)  Private citizens (even though they may have a vested interest) need not apply.  So if you want one, you have to convince your local Assembly member or senator, or one of the other designated officials to be your surrogate.
>
> Bill Cain, S.E.
> Berkeley CA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Maxwell <smaxwell(--nospam--at)engin.umich.edu>
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Sent: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:05:27 -0500 (EST)
> Subject: RE: California contract law
>
>
> Calling the Board is a good idea.  I will offer, however, that they MAY
> say that you must submit an official request for an interpretation to the
> attorney general's (for the state)...this was the case when I had a
> question about the PE Act in Michigan...basically the idea is that the AG
> is that "interpretor" for the State (unless the matter goes to court, in
> which case the court becomes the "interpretor").
>
> As to Paul's response, I took his response to mean that a non-engineer
> owner/rep of the company could sign the contract but you would still need
> to potentially have listed a responsible engineer (including their
> license number).  I don't know if that is a correct interpretation of the
> CA law or not (I might have a better opinion after I sit down to read the
> law provisions...I have to do so in order to complete the take-home
> law/ethics exam as part of getting my CA PE license) or if I am
> interpreting Paul's interpretation of the CA law correctly.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Scott
> Adrian, MI
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Yi Yang wrote:
>
> > This is confusing then, so what you are saying is that the person who signs
> the contract does not need to be a registered engineer, therefore no need to
> list PE number on the contract?
> >
> > I guess I should call the board.
> >
> >
> > Y i   Y a n g,   S. E.
> > STRUCTURAL DIVISION
> > SUMMIT ENGINEERING INC.
> > 707.527.0775.x162
> > Santa Rosa, California
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: Paul Feather [mailto:pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 1:57 PM
> > To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> > Subject: Re: California contract law
> >
> >
> > What you list is true, however there are other provisions in the code.
> >
> > Under the current regulations, a non-engineer may be an owner or part owner
> provided there IS at least one registered engineer in charge of engineering
> work.  The engineer legally must stamp and sign engineering work; however a
> contract agreement is not engineering work.  A financial officer or other legal
> representative of a firm may create legally binding contracts without being an
> engineer. As long as a duly registered engineer is listed as responsible for the
> work, it does not matter which corporate entity actually signs the contract.
> >
> > Oddly enough, there are direct provisions where a non-engineer owner cannot
> legally include their name as part of the firm name; but this does not prohibit
> the non-engineer owner from entering into legally binding agreements as the firm
> representative.
> >
> > Paul Feather PE, SE
> > www.SE-Solutions.net
> > pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net
> >
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: S. Gordin <mailto:mailbox(--nospam--at)sgeconsulting.com>
> >   To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> >   Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 12:52 PM
> >   Subject: Re: California contract law
> >
> >   Joe,
> >
> >   This is not about a proposal, but about a contract; IMO, these two are quite
> different.
> >
> >   The law is specific: "Before the Professional Engineer or Professional Land
> Surveyor begins work, they [PE-SG] need to sign a written contract with their
> client, or his or her representative. ..The written contract must include, but
> not be limited to, all of the . following:... 3. The name, address, and license
> or certificate number of the Professional Engineer..."
> >
> >   From the horse's mouth (California Business and Professions Code) this
> sounds like "6749. (a) A professional engineer shall use a written contract when
> contracting to provide professional engineering services to a client pursuant to
> this chapter. The written contract shall be executed by the professional
> engineer and the client, or his or her [client's, not PE's-SG]
> representative..."
> >
> >   Of course, this is all legal mumbo-jumbo, and we all long for a "word and
> handshake" contracts - but that's what it is.  And in situations that it may be
> questionable, it is always prudent to follow the letter of the law (refer to
> BORPELS bulletins).
> >
> >   And I've been wrong before, so whatever was offered above is just 2 cents
> (not necessarily mine), with no other value declared, expressed, or implied. :^)
> >
> >   Steve Gordin SE
> >   Irvine CA
> >
> >
> >
> >       ----- Original Message -----
> >       From: Jnapd(--nospam--at)aol.com
> >       To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> >       Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 12:22 PM
> >       Subject: Re: California contract law
> >
> >
> >       Steve:
> >
> >       I disagree on this one.
> >
> >       The proposal is to inform the client which registered engineer is will
> be signing the plans and calculations.  I do not see anything in the law that
> indicates that the registered engineer has to produce or sign the proposal.
> >
> >       Joe Venuti
> >       Johnson & Nielsen Associates
> >       Palm Springs, CA
> >
> >
> >
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********