tenant building owner relationships

[nhfire77]

I am in the process of bidding a fire alarm system addition. The Tenant is taking over the remaining 2000 sq feet of a building. Its a small add, straightforward. We are bidding as a sub under a main EC. The owner was made aware of some problems we noted with the existing fire alarm system. (for some reason all the sprinkler flow and tamper switch covers are missing! Among a few other small but important things) His response was:

The owner was made to put the fire alarm in, not me. I don't care about that problem when it comes to the bid. Just bid the upfit.

I responded: No problem. But if we fail the inspection, the repairs and reinspection fees will not be part of this bid.

Owner: OK, I get that, if we fail the inspection, I will tell the owner I cannot get an occupancy permit because his fire alarm is a problem. (the facp is located in the tennant's current space, and this AHJ doesn't appear to do annual inspections/walk throughs, but there will be one for this up fit)

Now, I know this is not the way to do things. But, the tenant wants it that way. I am temped to contact the owner, but, we or the main EC have no relationship with the owner. And this system is less than 2 years old. It was done right, but a few issues towards the end appears to have rushed the install, IMO. Somehow it passed inspection with these problems (except maybe the switch covers, I don't see anyone overlooking it)

We are drafting up a whole page of caveats to cover this problem. I am afraid of scaring everyone with all of the what if's I am jotting down.

Any thoughts?

 

[cadpoint]

... The owner was made aware of some problems we noted with the existing fire alarm system. (for some reason all the sprinkler flow and tamper switch covers are missing! Among a few other small but important things) His response was:

The owner was made to put the fire alarm in, not me. I don't care about that problem when it comes to the bid. Just bid the upfit.

I responded: No problem. But if we fail the inspection, the repairs and reinspection fees will not be part of this bid.

Ownertenant) OK, I get that, if we fail the inspection, I will tell the owner I cannot get an occupancy permit because his fire alarm is a problem. (the facp is currently located in his current space, and this AHJ doesn't appear to do annual inspections/walk throughs, but there will be one for this up fit)

This is the only avenue the renter can go down!

Now, I know this is not the way to do things.

You know it, your going to make a statement of "pay attention to me" that has already been identified as a problem.

But, the tenant wants it that way.

And they are right and have to pay to be in the building, they have to work and abide by other legal aspects of being a renter!

I am temped to contact the owner, but, we or the main EC have no relationship with the owner.

You should not get out infront of the EC it's not your play, you should address a letter to the EC that covers your sitituation in the bid or as a supplimental submittal for additional services with-in the bid.

And this system is less than 2 years old. It was done right, but a few issues towards the end appears to have rushed the install, IMO. Somehow it passed inspection with these problems (except maybe the switch covers, I don't see anyone overlooking it)

We are drafting up a whole page of caveats to cover this problem. I am afraid of scaring everyone with all of the what if's I am jotting down.

Any thoughts?

You report to the EC! This is not the only aspect of renting the space that the rental will face, your requirements to make a working system will be met!

 

[ceb58]

I wonder how it will play out with the actual owner of the property. Seems that he should be the one responsible for the complete up-fit and not the renter. But if the renter is going to pay for the up-fit and something causes the job to fail, that is own the owners side, then it will be between them to work out the details. Just CYA

 

[nhfire77]

Cadpoint,

The EC and I are working together, no one looking to step on someones toes.

I dont know what the leases are like, but the space being upfit was already a finished space. The deal was the tenant could take over any amount of space, on his dime.

 

[charlietuna]

Three words "Cover your butt"!

 

[cadpoint]

It's a rental space first off, that's just typical standard business pratice around here.

Vanillia box IE take it as it, the space is the signee's, they can pay for what they want or do other, or take it as it is, all with a lease and the owners blessing!

The building will be permited and the space get inspected, with this volume of this up-fit.

I'm sure you know what your doing, there no question in my mind!

You asked I stated... :grin:

 

[growler]

I am in the process of bidding a fire alarm system addition. The Tenant is taking over the remaining 2000 sq feet of a building.

I responded: No problem. But if we fail the inspection, the repairs and reinspection fees will not be part of this bid.

Owner: OK, I get that, if we fail the inspection, I will tell the owner I cannot get an occupancy permit because his fire alarm is a problem.

Problems like this are very common. We have something that we know will have to be done in order to pass inspection but no one wants to admit it.

It not really if you fail the inspection because if they look at the job you will fail the inspection ( you know this ).

If it were me then I would call the Fire Marshal's Office right now and discuss the problem and what will be expected to pass the inspection.

I never care who is going to pay for work but I like to have someone's name on the contract that states they will take responsibility for payment and I like to have it before the job starts.

The tenant needs to know right now that before the job is finished either he or the owner will have to pay for the extra work and a decision needs to be made now. Once a decision is made then the money should be there when needed.

 

[nhfire77]

If, I call the Fire Dept, and tell them the fire alarm is deficient, and the owner/tenant gets a visit, you think I am getting the job???

I know , I know morally and all. None of the problems are critical, life safety issues (yet)

I want to tell the owner so he can begin to wrap his brain around the fact the original installing company screwed him and he's on the hook for it. From a non-biased point of view, the code violations are in the common section of the fire alarm, not a tenant space area. So the owner is on the hook. Of course, the owner will say, now that the tenant has the entire building, he's responsible. Even if the lease doesn't say that.

If, I get the job, I plan on getting the permit, performing the work. Then calling for the inspection, giving the inspector a heads up that, we have not inspected or tested the rest of the fire alarm. Not mentioning anything else. Then, we'll see what happens.

 

[satcom]

I want to tell the owner so he can begin to wrap his brain around the fact the original installing company screwed him and he's on the hook for it. From a non-biased point of view, the code violations are in the common section of the fire alarm, not a tenant space area. So the owner is on the hook. Of course, the owner will say, now that the tenant has the entire building, he's responsible. Even if the lease doesn't say that.

The building owner must of been, or is still under contract with the company that installed and monitors the flow devices, it may be the building owner failed to pay the annual maint and inspection fees.
How could you do any work on the fire system without holding the contract on the bulding?

 

[nhfire77]

Even though there is supposed to be a contract in place, AHJ's around here don't enforce it, and regularly its unenforceable becuase the current service provider has violated the contract by not providing adequate service. And it's monitored by the fire departments radio box. Not a central station.

The original installer is a very large regional company that sucks at what they do, but have low prices, and a big sucky staff of techs. I get to clean up their mess about 3-4 times a year.

Also, just about 90% of central station fire alarms in ma/nh monitoring agreements do not include maintainence/testing. I regularly test others systems, as long as it's not a proprietary system.

 

[satcom]

Even though there is supposed to be a contract in place, AHJ's around here don't enforce it, and regularly its unenforceable becuase the current service provider has violated the contract by not providing adequate service. And it's monitored by the fire departments radio box. Not a central station.

The original installer is a very large regional company that sucks at what they do, but have low prices, and a big sucky staff of techs. I get to clean up their mess about 3-4 times a year.

Also, just about 90% of central station fire alarms in ma/nh monitoring agreements do not include maintainence/testing. I regularly test others systems, as long as it's not a proprietary system.

It may not be the regional company that is the problem, it sounds like the building owner may not of paid the annual contract fees and that may be why the system is not maintained, I would think you may need a contract from the owner to proceed with any work on the building system.

Many times we hear the owner complain about the bad service o fire systems, only to discover they never paid for any service.

 

[nhfire77]

It may not be the regional company that is the problem, it sounds like the building owner may not of paid the annual contract fees and that may be why the system is not maintained, I would think you may need a contract from the owner to proceed with any work on the building system.

Many times we hear the owner complain about the bad service o fire systems, only to discover they never paid for any service.

I assure you there is no, and was no contract for service. No one around here is willing to pay for a repair/testing contract when they pay a municipality an annual fee.

When I say no one, I mean almost no one. Hospitals, large facilities etc do.

I agree the owner needs to be aware the work will be done, and sign off on it.

 

[petersonra]

I never understand why people fret over this kind of thing. Do the work that you are being paid for. Make it clear upfront that you think there are some issues that have to be addressed that are outside of the scope of work that you are being paid to perform and leave it at that.

It's not your problem. Trying to sic the fire marshal on someone in this kind of a situation is almost certainly going to be viewed poorly by everyone involved, including the fire marshal. Everyone is going to assume there is something in it for you and that is why you called the fire marshal. This is the kind of stupid crap that can give you a really bad reputation for being a PITA that takes a long time to go away, even if you are right and there is additional work that should be addressed. Do you really want everyone involved gossiping around town about how you screwed over your own customer? Because inevitably that will be how it is presented.

It's your job to do the work you are being paid for correctly. If you can't deal with some other piece of the puzzle being undone, then just tell the guy you are not interested in the work and move on to the next job.

JMNSHO.

 

[nhfire77]

Petersonra, I agree that's what I'm gonna do, see post #8.

I was just looking for a bit of perspective.

 

[satcom]

"I never understand why people fret over this kind of thing. Do the work that you are being paid for."


The reason they fret over this, is Life safety issues are not something you shoot from the hip, they require you to follow strict standards codes, and consider liability isssues,

Fire unlike electrical work, requires unique insurance coverages, with errors and omissions, and contracts with special liability clauses, and you marry the projects.

 

[nhfire77]

"I never understand why people fret over this kind of thing. Do the work that you are being paid for."


The reason they fret over this, is Life safety issues are not something you shoot from the hip, they require you to follow strict standards codes, and consider liability isssues,

Fire unlike electrical work, requires unique insurance coverages, with errors and omissions, and contracts with special liability clauses, and you marry the projects.

Yes, its life safety. I understand the seriousness of the subfield of fire alarms acutely. I also sleep soundly at night knowing I did my best, and always send xmas cards to my insurance agent.

'...you marry the projects'

Oh the drama!!!

I refuse to fret over my work. I might obsess(since I crawl a NEC code forum), but not fret. Worrying is bad for you, and it is counter productive. Its downright unhealthy. Please don't bother countering with something like: you have to sweat small and get everything right with life safety. Of course you have to get it right. That doesn't equal being perfect, I'm not sweating a detail that isn't critical, and I wouldn't do a job that left an unresolved issue that was one.

To illustrate my point :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5G7bGBUlx2M

The dog might me you. The bone is the business business. I have an umbrella.


Back on topic: The Main EC for the project got an estimate. He was there when I noted the problems. He and I agree, we are going to put in a contract (that includes we noted deficiencies that need correction, but will not be addressed unless paid for, and we will offer to do the work) and if we get it, we will do what needs to be done to make it safe, without doing free work. Might something bad happen and we both get sued somehow? Maybe just maybe. It's not gonna keep me up at night. If, that's wrong, I don't wanna be right.

 

[MichaelGP3]

Fascinating thread....

Fascinating thread....

But also a bit of a sticky wicket. But first, I'm wondering,

1.) Is the panel normal, or do the issues you've identified keep the panel in trouble?
2.) Are troubles and supervisory conditions transmitted thru the radio link to the Fire Department, or only alarms? (I know next to nothing about this kind of monitoring by Fire Departments).
3.) What kind of set up and monthly costs are associated with this method of alarm monitoring? Does the user buy or lease the rf transmitter?

OTOH, if it goes into the red, you'll have enough material to pen a screenplay that would not be difficult to market.

 

[mtfallsmikey]

A take from the ownership side...

A take from the ownership side...

Have been in similar situations like this, since I work as a building engineer for a property mgt. co. Any tenant work/prints must be approved by us first. Any testing/FM/AHJ approvals, etc. are tenant responsibility. We require them to work in conjunction with our fire system test/service contractor. We require C of I's from all contractors, working for us and tenants. We all need to CYA....

 

[nhfire77]

But also a bit of a sticky wicket. But first, I'm wondering,

1.) Is the panel normal, or do the issues you've identified keep the panel in trouble?
2.) Are troubles and supervisory conditions transmitted thru the radio link to the Fire Department, or only alarms? (I know next to nothing about this kind of monitoring by Fire Departments).
3.) What kind of set up and monthly costs are associated with this method of alarm monitoring? Does the user buy or lease the rf transmitter?

OTOH, if it goes into the red, you'll have enough material to pen a screenplay that would not be difficult to market.

1- no they are chapter 3 and article 800 violations.

2- all troubles/supervisories are monitored by the FD, it's not in trouble.

3- the average retail cost for this specific unit is $4,000.00-$6,000.00. You buy it. The cities charge anywhere between $120-$500/year. I don't know about this one specifically. They are one way radios. It's ancient technology, but it's proven.

There is a cheaper method used by some municipalities (~$1500) and those are two way transceiver. Those are much safer and better, but are only two watt radios. Those types form a wireless mesh network.

 

[nhfire77]

Have been in similar situations like this, since I work as a building engineer for a property mgt. co. Any tenant work/prints must be approved by us first. Any testing/FM/AHJ approvals, etc. are tenant responsibility. We require them to work in conjunction with our fire system test/service contractor. We require C of I's from all contractors, working for us and tenants. We all need to CYA....

I have wondered about this relationship in this case. Knowing there might be "issues" the job was padded by all parties. I'm not confident that we'll be the low bid, but I'm confident I know all the possible problems the other guy might not figure out.