Nixer Cost

muffler

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Agree with you! Also it is important to note from experience, that the "guy around the corner" who undertakes to do a job for €800.00 is providing an appalling service, even with the smallest of projects! Taking into account the number of meetings required, surveys of properties, re-designs, valid planning applications etc. It's a joke really and in my opinion dumb down our profession!!

Who or rather what type of person are you referring to here?

ConfusedTech

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Agree with you! Also it is important to note from experience, that the "guy around the corner" who undertakes to do a job for €800.00 is providing an appalling service, even with the smallest of projects! Taking into account the number of meetings required, surveys of properties, re-designs, valid planning applications etc. It's a joke really and in my opinion dumb down our profession!!

Be careful Pseudo!, I got my ears clipped when I suggested this before on Boards. (5 more Hail Mary's for you) There are some good people who provide low cost services, and we cant accredit the cost to the quality. That said, I would agree that a large proportion of the low cost jobs don't hit the mark and do give the good guys a bad name, as in any industry. They really dont account for the fact taht a survey, client meetings, site assessment is required before you even put mouse to mat.

I am concerned that the amount of new people on the circuit, straight out of offices, offering planning services to people don't appreciate the work involved in putting in a planning for even a small extension. I fear that there will be a large amount of disgruntled customers over the next year.

No6

ConfusedTech wrote: »

We should also all remember that when working from home, and for ones-self, you have a certain level of expenses that you can charge back off the Gross income. You also have the advantage of not having to travel to work, that cost and that time. Working from home will be the new black for those trying to save and get the best value out of their house and mortgage.

I opperate from home and have done so since 2000, I'm still in buisness just about, I do have the advantage of lower overheads and yes i can write off some of my costs but beware it tough going.

And for anyone considering doing nixers a nixer is work done by someone when employed elsewhere and not declared and would be a form of tax evasion, or if done when unemployed is welfare fraud.

And if you are considering hiring someone to do a nixer you may (IMO will) not get the level of service you expect, there will not be any professional indemnity insurance, no follow on after planning etc etc (I could go on!!)

pseudo-tech

muffler wrote: »

Who or rather what type of person are you referring to here?

The guy or the girl who undertake projects without paying TAX. Normally no PI which in my opinion are providing an appalling service to the person who employs them. There have been many times that I have taken over projects to tidy up projects started by this group of people, who in my opinion don't care enough!

Its wrong at any level, if you want to provide a professional service, register for TAX and take out PI so that you can provide your client with an acceptable service.

pseudo-tech

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Be careful Pseudo!, I got my ears clipped when I suggested this before on Boards. (5 more Hail Mary's for you) There are some good people who provide low cost services, and we cant accredit the cost to the quality. That said, I would agree that a large proportion of the low cost jobs don't hit the mark and do give the good guys a bad name, as in any industry. They really dont account for the fact taht a survey, client meetings, site assessment is required before you even put mouse to mat.

I am concerned that the amount of new people on the circuit, straight out of offices, offering planning services to people don't appreciate the work involved in putting in a planning for even a small extension. I fear that there will be a large amount of disgruntled customers over the next year.

I agree with you in relation to that point. However, for that price they may not have a need to cover costs and may be doing it out of pure enjoyment. However, it is important that we provide a good quality service and i feel that if you take on a project and don't have PI to cover the service, that this is wrong. If you do have PI and pay TAX, €800.00 will not cover the basic overheads.

ConfusedTech

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I agree with you in relation to that point. However, for that price they may not have a need to cover costs and may be doing it out of pure enjoyment. However, it is important that we provide a good quality service and i feel that if you take on a project and don't have PI to cover the service, that this is wrong. If you do have PI and pay TAX, €800.00 will not cover the basic overheads.

Does PI come into play really if you are providing a drawing service only, or just taking a project up to Planning? This is the problem.

It is really only required for surveying or from Tender onwards when you need to be indemnified for what is being built or built on or physically priced. It would be up to the person taking over the job at Tender to ensure that the planning and drawings are up to scratch, as they take over the responsibility and indemnity of the accuracy and compliance of the drawings. The guys up to planning can get away with murder. A good drafter can rehash four plannings in a month. With no overheads and even paying their tax, that is still a rather good income. Again, I couldnt compete with that, and I would certainly question the accuracy of what is being produced.

muffler

pseudo-tech wrote: »

The guy or the girl who undertake projects without paying TAX. Normally no PI which in my opinion are providing an appalling service to the person who employs them. There have been many times that I have taken over projects to tidy up projects started by this group of people, who in my opinion don't care enough!

Its wrong at any level, if you want to provide a professional service, register for TAX and take out PI so that you can provide your client with an acceptable service.

I can see no logic whatsoever in that statement. Whether or not a person pays tax or needs to register for VAT doesn't make that person any better or any worse than some of the so called "professionals" you refer to.

You seem to be inferring that paying tax and having PI cover guarantees a better service. Thats far off the mark. Yes, I like others, have been brought in on projects when others have failed to provide an adequate service and I recall one of those cases involved an RIAI registered architect of long standing who basically made a balls of it.

Your argument here would be on a par with the guys in the building trade over the last few years who went out and bought their transit van and got their name and the words "registered contractor" painted all over it. That didnt result in them providing even a better service or a good quality of work.

muffler

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Does PI come into play really if you are providing a drawing service only, or just taking a project up to Planning? This is the problem.

What about your construction drawings?

pseudo-tech

muffler wrote: »

I can see no logic whatsoever in that statement. Whether or not a person pays tax or needs to register for VAT doesn't make that person any better or any worse than some of the so called "professionals" you refer to.

You seem to be inferring that paying tax and having PI cover guarantees a better service. Thats far off the mark. Yes, I like others, have been brought in on projects when others have failed to provide an adequate service and I recall one of those cases involved an RIAI registered architect of long standing who basically made a balls of it.

Your argument here would be on a par with the guys in the building trade over the last few years who went out and bought their transit van and got their name and the words "registered contractor" painted all over it. That didnt result in them providing even a better service or a good quality of work.

Muffler, having PI cover is a minimum request by all the professional representation bodies for their self-employed members. They believe that this is not to cover you the professional but to provide a cover for the client. Mistakes happen by even the best of use and if you do not have PI cover to cover that mistake then it is a disservice to the people that you are providing that service to.

In relation to TAX, if you are not paying it, in my opinion straight away it calls your character into question. You used the man in the van analogy. I would suggest it is no better than one of those guys that put a flyer in your door with only a mobile number and no name or address advertising to tarmacadam your drive.

ConfusedTech

muffler wrote: »

What about your construction drawings?

If you are only providing a drawing service for somebody, ie another architect, it does not matter what you draw relative to PI, as they are taking on the liability.

I noted in my post that after Tender, PI is required personally. Last time I looked, Construction came after Tender!

pseudo-tech

ConfusedTech wrote: »

If you are only providing a drawing service for somebody, ie another architect, it does not matter what you draw relative to PI, as they are taking on the liability.

I noted in my post that after Tender, PI is required personally. Last time I looked, Construction came after Tender!

Once you prepare any level of drawing service you should have PI. What if the clients decide to build from your planning drawings?? If something goes wrong the courts will chase the last professional involved even if they qualified their quote. After all you are the professional!

In relation to providing contract service for other offices. If those offices checked there PI application form they will see that it asks do you contract out work and if so do the sub-contractor provide their own PI for their services.

muffler

ConfusedTech wrote: »

If you are only providing a drawing service for somebody, ie another architect, it does not matter what you draw relative to PI, as they are taking on the liability.

I thought you meant that you were doing both planning and working drawings yourself in which case you would need PI cover.

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I noted in my post that after Tender, PI is required personally. Last time I looked, Construction came after Tender!

And I said "construction drawings" - not "construction" if you care to read it.

ConfusedTech

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Once you prepare any level of drawing service you should have PI. What if the clients decide to build from your planning drawings?? If something goes wrong the courts will chase the last professional involved even if they qualified their quote. After all you are the professional!

In relation to providing contract service for other offices. If those offices checked there PI application form they will see that it asks do you contract out work and if so do the sub-contractor provide their own PI for their services.

Sorry Pseudo, it does not work that way. Planning Drawings are for Planning only. If a client decides to use the drawings for construction they don't have a leg to stand on. No judge would tell them to chase the person who did Planning drawings. This is why we write for Planning Purposes only on them. There is a big jump from planning to even tendering drawings never mind construction. The reality is there is little or no indemnity required for Planning drawings, only the surveying of same. There should be! I agree.

It asks the question on the form, as does it on mine. The answer can be 'no'. You wont lose your PI, but they will then have the right to review this persons operations, or increase your own PI cover to counteract this. If your principle is correct, what about all the contract workers through agencies and privately!!! A very small percentage of them hold PI. It is a given that the architect with the contract that issues the drawings to the client takes whole responsibility for the work. There is no halfway house here.

topcatcbr

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Topcat, your reality seems to be different that everyone elses. When you compare us with England where a qualified Architect may only earn 35K in certain contexts, there was a need for an adjustment here. A new reality!!!

I'm sorry if i am in a different reality but the reality i am in is that a newly qualified carpenter can expect a salary of this amount. This for somebody with a third level qualification plus experience does not seem fair to me and i was surprised by it. Especially since it would be piecemeal with no definite terms and conditions of employment. I appreciate it is twice min wage but we are not talking about stacking shelves.

smashey

Just a thought here to keep the conversation flowing. I notice a few posts where the word "nixer" is being boycotted for obvious reasons.

Why not use the term "private work"?

luckat

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Agreed Pseudo, Nixers, or 'Nicksers' as the real term states

No, no! 'Nixer' is correct - 'nix tax', in other words.

sydthebeat

ive created a new thread regarding the whole PI issue...

please keep this thread to the topic as stated...