Professional Fees Chargeable to Architects and Quantity Surveyors

**RJM** Wed Sep 01, 2010 7:51 pm

On 1st February, 2010 the Architects and Quantity Surveyors [Registration] Act, 2010 was passed in the National Assembly and gazzetted on 26th March, 2010. Section 51 of this Act is of interesting to me which states

51(1) Every architect, quantity surveyor and every firm shall be bound by the scale of fee, prescribed by the Board notwithstanding any provision in any other law, regulations or by-laws of the authority, association, institute, society or organization to which he is a member.

51(2) Any provision in any law. Regulation, by-law of any authority, association, institute, society, organization of architects or quantity surveyors or firms, incorporated or founded, providing for a minimum scale of fee for services rendered by an architect, quantity surveyor or firm shall not bind any member in relation to any rendered in Tanzania and that provisions in any law, regulation or by-law shall not be forward as a ground for claiming fee at a rate less than the rate prescribed, authorized, approved or decided by the Board or person appointed by the Board to as an arbitrator.

The practice has been charging professional fees as percentage of construction cost as provided in the By-Law 2000 [AQRB]. Now that law is in place which bounds practitioners use the scale of fee prescribed by the Board I believe this will make charging professional fees based on the percentage of construction cost more “rigorously enforced” by the Board if at all this law precede other laws the way it appears. Based on the above, I have the following concern regarding this section.

I am aware that Standard Request for Proposals [SRFP] prepared and issued by PPRA do not provide provision consultant to charge professional fee based on the percentage of construction cost. The referred RFPs are based on either Lump-sum Contracts [payment slinked with the output] or Time-based Contract [payments linked with the inputs] and are structured in such way that the cost estimates for the assignments are build-up on basis of staff-months/days/weeks, reimbursable costs etc. However, I have to say that R83(3) allows use of percentage contract in the circumstances that if it is based on a fixed target cost [I believe that the idea here is to establish the “cap” which the client will pay to the consultant]. Base on this I think PPRA position is procuring entities to use the RFP as they are. However, we would like PPRA to comment on this. My main concern is whether AQRB can raise objections where the procuring entities issue the RFPs which do not containing provision of paying professional fees based on the construction cost?

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30