In arbitration over cost overruns where professional services were provided, which ruling aligns with the scenario described?

• A. The owner wins automatically when cost overruns occur.
• B. The architect is exonerated if they provided the services as agreed and met the standard of care.
• C. The architect has failed to provide services agreed upon by both parties in their written agreement, which exceeded the professional skill and care ordinarily provided.
• D. Arbitration cannot address professional disputes.

Answer: (C)

In disputes over professional services resolved by arbitration, the central question is whether the architect performed according to the written agreement and met the standard of care expected in the profession. If the services provided do not align with what was agreed in the contract and the level of skill or care falls short of the customary standard, that constitutes a breach of contract and grounds for relief or remedies through arbitration. This means the architect may be held responsible for cost overruns tied to that breach, rather than automatically favoring the owner or exonerating the architect. Arbitration is a valid avenue for resolving such disputes because it addresses whether the services were delivered as promised and to the required professional standard. If the architect had delivered the agreed services and met the standard of care, there would be no breach, and cost overruns would not automatically result in liability.