[Bell Historians] Steelwork into masonary

[Richard Offen]

--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "Chris Pickford" 
<c.j.pickford.t21 at ...> wrote:
>
> Rod Bickerton "The prime contractor is where the buck stops."
> 
> Sorry, Rod, you're not having a good day. That can't be right. A 
contractor would be at fault if he failed to adhere to the 
specification prepared by a supervising architect. If, where there 
has been discussion, an architect fails to accept alternative advice 
and insists on an unsatisfactory specification - and is aware of the 
risk of failure or problems - then the architect should be held to 
blame.
> 
> It's high time an aggreived parish tested the professional 
indemnity cover of architects who behave like this. The trouble is, 
nobody wants the fuss - and litigation is always expensive - but 
let's be clear that architects can't claim fees and walk away scott 
free with no liability in cases such as these where "things go wrong" 
and alternative practical advice has been ignored or brushed aside.
> 

I entirely agree with Chris.

My experience over many years is that the bell hanger only discovers 
after a contract has been sign and work commenced just what a 'twat' 
the church architect is.   There, are of course some excellent 
architects, but oh boy did I come across some duffers in my years as 
a diocesan advisor.

Take the case of the architect who decided that the foundation 
grillage for a new bell frame was her responsibility and installed a 
set of totally unsuitable steelwork in the tower without any 
consultation with the bell foundry whatsoever.   Imagine the 
bellhanger's surprise when he turned up with a complete set of 
steelwork only to find that an apology for a foundation grillage was 
already grouted in just where he was supposed to put the real stuff!

I can think of many other examples where an architect has totally 
ruined a potentially good job by insistence of inappropriate 
actions ...and it is always the bellfounder/bellhanger that gets the 
blame!

Richard