🚨 Need Advice! Overcharged for Engineering Report 🚨

[vas]

I need help dealing with an engineer who is massively overcharging me for an engineering report on my modified, written-off Jeep to get it roadworthy.

🔹 Initially, he quoted me $3,500 - $4,500.
🔹 First invoice: $5,315 (already above the quote).
🔹 Second invoice: $1,375.
🔹 Now, he has sent another invoice for $3,100!

This is way more than double what I was originally quoted. I feel like I’m being ripped off.

Has anyone dealt with something like this before? What can I do? Any advice on how to report him or fight these unfair charges?

Would really appreciate any guidance! 🙏 Am in Adelaide.

[Shoota_77]

For me I'd need some serious justification for why it has blown out.  Have you questioned him on it?  To be honest if you didn't question him right from the get-go on the first invoice that was already way over the initial quote and then you've (presumably) then paid another $1375 on top of the first invoice, then you're pushing shit uphill to get a favourable result now...

It was years ago I last got an engineer out but it was around $450-$550 per visit.  That was just to inspect each progress point he gave me for the project.  Is he just doing progress inspections or is he providing engineering diagrams, technical assistance, etc??  If he's not, he's a filthy rip off merchant.  If the $3100 is the final sign off then you need to cop it on the chin, pay it and move on.  If it's not, piss him off and get a new one.  Not many Jeeps I'd value at $10K full stop let alone just engineering fees on a written off, half actual value WOVR Jeep....

[GTSBoy]

Can we see a scan of the original quote?

The problem with engineers (and by this, I mean, all engineers across all engineering industries) is that there are "engineers" and there are "engineers" (you'll have to imagine the two different vocal emphases on those two versions of the same word.

Engineering is a mindset - your farm kid who spent his life rebuilding the tractor will likely make a good engineer. The farm kid who spent his life taking photos of butterflies.. perhaps not. But on top of that mindset, the modern engineer has to learn how to write so that there is absolutely no way of being misunderstood. Proposals/budget estimates/quotations are one place where this is absolutely vital. You have to delineate your scope of supply with extremely hard boundaries, and anywhere where there is any possibility of not being able to have such a hard boundary, you need to write language that will cover you from scope creep, cost overruns, the inevitable interference of the client or their "engineer", etc etc.

Now, if your clients are the BHPs and the Rio Tintos of the world, and similar, then you get good at this. If you are an automotive engineer, pitching work to the great unwashed masses, your skills in this area might not be well developed, because you're only dealing with knuckle draggers trying to get a big block legal in a Torana. And when I say "might not"....I'd suggest there's a better than even chance that any such skills might be completely absent.

So, we might be able to look at your quote and see what the opportunities are for rebuttal.

[MBS206]

Geez, engineers fees have definitely gone up.

Mine back 2007 cost me all of $300.

Mind you, I had to go back to him a few times to get him to write the correct things on the report after he'd inspected it. Things like wrong exhaust size, wrong wheel sizes, etc etc.

[GTSBoy]

f**k. I charge that per hour.

[The Bogan]

Does that price include the rack time to straighten the frame and body and replacement of parts and paint, as well as the noise and emmisions testing 

The last engineering certificate I had done, albeit about 15 years ago, was around $1000 for a few inspections and the certificate 

[Shoota_77]

Slight segway but the most expensive part of the whole thing which I would have thought would only be required for an engine size/type swap, not a VIV test, is emissions testing.  That's when you get into the big bucks.  I can't remember the exact price now but I got quotes for the GT-R based on swapping to RB30 (not that anyone bothers doing it legally anymore...) and it was around $4500 just for that alone.  The guy that does them manipulates the tune on the vehicle to make sure it passes.  The cheaper option is to book into Kangan Batman Tafe (I think that's where it was) and hire their tester.  Allegedly you're not allowed in there with the car though so not in a position to tweak anything to make sure the vehicle passes.  I'm sure in this day and age of ultra tuneable ECU's you could get the tuner to program a special efficiency (clean) tune that emits the lowest amount of particulates possible that would pass the test.  It might only make 50kW's but as long as it passed who cares!

[GTSBoy]

20 minutes ago, Shoota_77 said:

I'm sure in this day and age of ultra tuneable ECU's you could get the tuner to program a special efficiency (clean) tune that emits the lowest amount of particulates possible that would pass the test.  It might only make 50kW's but as long as it passed who cares!

Yeah - but it's not actually that easy. There are limits for HC, CO, NOx and particulates. Particulates shouldn't be a concern in any petrol engine unless trying to comply to the very latest Euro standard. But getting a tune right so that all the others stay within limits AT THE SAME TIME is not a trivial exercise. You couldn't possibly get it right by just guessing at the tuner's dyno, unless he had a 4 gas analyser up the pipe, which is not often the case these days. It used to be. Every decent shop that did "tune ups" (as opposed to tuning) would have a 4 gas analsyer. Perhaps there's still quite a few of them around these days. But most "tuners" are only watching O2 and power readings.

[The Bogan]

21 minutes ago, Shoota_77 said:

Slight segway but the most expensive part of the whole thing which I would have thought would only be required for an engine size/type swap, not a VIV test, is emissions testing.  That's when you get into the big bucks.  I can't remember the exact price now but I got quotes for the GT-R based on swapping to RB30 (not that anyone bothers doing it legally anymore...) and it was around $4500 just for that alone.  The guy that does them manipulates the tune on the vehicle to make sure it passes.  The cheaper option is to book into Kangan Batman Tafe (I think that's where it was) and hire their tester.  Allegedly you're not allowed in there with the car though so not in a position to tweak anything to make sure the vehicle passes.  I'm sure in this day and age of ultra tuneable ECU's you could get the tuner to program a special efficiency (clean) tune that emits the lowest amount of particulates possible that would pass the test.  It might only make 50kW's but as long as it passed who cares!

From when I was looking at getting the 86 engineered for the turbo, the joint said to put in a few euro 5 or 6 cats, then tune the car on a nice clean E85 tune

When I was looking at a turbo for the MX5, it was basically the same thing, a couple of cats and a nice clean tune

Although, it will depend on the year of the Jeep IRT emmisions standards required, and what mods are done, especially if it has a newer engine installed that requires a higher Euro

[MBS206]

8 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

f**k. I charge that per hour.

Well, in 2007 he must have been charging about $1800 an hour. He only looked at the car for 5 minutes. And another 4 to write the report wrong, and another minute to correct it.

Mind you, this was for a car that was:

Stock engine, fmic (hole in drivers guard), all alloy intake and custom air box, 3 inch turbo back exhaust, lowered, and a set of 17" Advans (255/40/17 rear and 235/45/17 front).

It was nothing crazy. The blue slipper wanted the "hole in the guard" engineered. But that was because he got the shits that I wouldn't "relocate the battery from the boot, back to the factory position in the engine bay"... In an R33 GTST...

 

 

Also for emissions, E85, and don't go wild on timing. It's amazing how the closer you get ignition timing towards max torque, the last couple of degrees really throw NOx counts right up. And for the huge increase in emissions, it's only a small increase in torque.

[TurboTapin]

13 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

Can we see a scan of the original quote?

The problem with engineers (and by this, I mean, all engineers across all engineering industries) is that there are "engineers" and there are "engineers" (you'll have to imagine the two different vocal emphases on those two versions of the same word.

Engineering is a mindset - your farm kid who spent his life rebuilding the tractor will likely make a good engineer. The farm kid who spent his life taking photos of butterflies.. perhaps not. But on top of that mindset, the modern engineer has to learn how to write so that there is absolutely no way of being misunderstood. Proposals/budget estimates/quotations are one place where this is absolutely vital. You have to delineate your scope of supply with extremely hard boundaries, and anywhere where there is any possibility of not being able to have such a hard boundary, you need to write language that will cover you from scope creep, cost overruns, the inevitable interference of the client or their "engineer", etc etc.

Now, if your clients are the BHPs and the Rio Tintos of the world, and similar, then you get good at this. If you are an automotive engineer, pitching work to the great unwashed masses, your skills in this area might not be well developed, because you're only dealing with knuckle draggers trying to get a big block legal in a Torana. And when I say "might not"....I'd suggest there's a better than even chance that any such skills might be completely absent.

So, we might be able to look at your quote and see what the opportunities are for rebuttal.

Out of curiosity, I believe the title of "Engineer" is not protected in Australia like it is over here. I'm curious, does Australia actually have professional engineers do vehicle inspections?  If so, Jesus Christ what in the f**k.

Edited February 11 by TurboTapin

[The Bogan]

6 hours ago, TurboTapin said:

Out of curiosity, I believe the title of "Engineer" is not protected in Australia like it is over here. I'm curious, does Australia actually have professional engineers do vehicle inspections?  If so, Jesus Christ what in the f**k.

Yeap, legal modifications are limited 

We have rules and regulations on what you can do legally

This is for NSW, other states have different governing bodies 

https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/vehicle-registration/how-to-register/registering-a-used-or-secondhand-vehicle/modified-and-non-standard-vehicles

https://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/RMS-13.464-Light-vehicle-modifications-Vehicle-Standards-Information-No-6-November-2013.pdf

Lots of people just roll the dice though and just hope they don't get picked up,  as the police and RMS occasionally run roadside inspections, getting "defected" for not complying can be a painful and expensive experience 

[MBS206]

7 hours ago, TurboTapin said:

Out of curiosity, I believe the title of "Engineer" is not protected in Australia like it is over here. I'm curious, does Australia actually have professional engineers do vehicle inspections?  If so, Jesus Christ what in the f**k.

The title of Engineer is not protected. However different states have different rules about what an Engineer requires to operate.

Engineering for a motor vehicle modification is very different to engineering for a bridge, electronics, etc, including what that engineer needs as certifications.

 

In Canberra, "Engineer" is the loosest category with basically nothing stopping you calling yourself and engineer and designing a bridge or building.

From what I've reviewed, QLD has the strictest requirements through RPEIQ.

[GTSBoy]

8 hours ago, TurboTapin said:

Out of curiosity, I believe the title of "Engineer" is not protected in Australia like it is over here. I'm curious, does Australia actually have professional engineers do vehicle inspections?  If so, Jesus Christ what in the f**k.

This is actually 2 whole different trains of thought that need to be addressed separately.

No, as Matt says above, "Engineer" is not a directly protected title. A lot of guys who just do mechanical design via CAD, with or without even some sort of associate diploma in engineering, often have the job title of "Design Engineer". A train driver can probably still describe themselves as an engineer.

But, to usefully get employment with anyone as a proper engineer, you're going to have to have at least the necessary and relevant degree qualification. You're not going to get a job as an electrical engineer if you have a chem eng degree, unless you can demonstrate x number of years of working in that capacity, sufficient knowledge, etc. Having the degree is at least in indication that you've seen the relevant text books, even if you haven't read them (like pretty much the last 10 years of graduates!).

To be a self employed engineer.....you could get away with quite a lot pretending that you're suitably qualified, without actually being a proper engineer. But, you will find yourself unable to work for a large section of the client space because a lot demand CVs and capability statements when considering contracting for any engineering work these days. Insurances too. If you're not a proper engineer, it will be much harder to obtain proper PI insurance. Insurance companies have gotten hip to that.

The "Professional Engineer" thing is a thing in Australia. If you have the right qualifications and experience you can apply to the relevant engineering top level body (mostly Engineers Australia, the less said about whom, the better), to be assessed and approved as a Chartered Professional Engineer, CPE. There are high bars to get over and a requirement for CPD to maintain it. The RPEQ thing is similar-ish, in that you have to demonstrate and maintain, but the bars are a little lower. It is required to be RPEQ in order to sign off as an engineer on any engineering design in Queensland. The other states haven't fully followed suit yet.

There's "engineering" and there's "engineering". Being an engineer that signs off on timber (or even steel) frames for housing projects, council creek crossing bridges, etc, is a flavour of civil engineering that barely warrants the name, description and degree. That would be soul crushing work anyway. Being an automotive engineer working in the space where you have to sign off on modifications to cars and trucks would also be similarly soul crushing. At least partly because of the level of clientelle, their expecations, depths of bank balance, etc.

And that brings us to your second question.

No, we do not have professional engineers "do vehicle inspections". Well, not the regular roadworthies, etc etc. That's done by mechanics. There might be some vehicle standards engineers at the various state govco inspection stations where cars go to get defects cleared and so on, but that's because they (the cars) are there specifically for defect inspection and clearance and so the stakes are a little higher than on an annual lights and brakes working check.

But, if you modify a vehicle in Australia, you have to get it engineered. A suitably qualified (and effectively licensed, which I will get back to) automotive engineer will have to go over the application, advise on what would be required to make the mods legal, supervise some parts of the work, inspect and test the results, and sign off.

The "licensed" aspect comes from there being a list of approved engineers to do these things in each state. They have to jump through hoops set up by the govco vehicle standards divisions that mean only the suitably qualified can offer to and approve such mods.

[The Bogan]

6 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

This is actually 2 whole different trains of thought that need to be addressed separately.

No, as Matt says above, "Engineer" is not a directly protected title. A lot of guys who just do mechanical design via CAD, with or without even some sort of associate diploma in engineering, often have the job title of "Design Engineer". A train driver can probably still describe themselves as an engineer.

But, to usefully get employment with anyone as a proper engineer, you're going to have to have at least the necessary and relevant degree qualification. You're not going to get a job as an electrical engineer if you have a chem eng degree, unless you can demonstrate x number of years of working in that capacity, sufficient knowledge, etc. Having the degree is at least in indication that you've seen the relevant text books, even if you haven't read them (like pretty much the last 10 years of graduates!).

To be a self employed engineer.....you could get away with quite a lot pretending that you're suitably qualified, without actually being a proper engineer. But, you will find yourself unable to work for a large section of the client space because a lot demand CVs and capability statements when considering contracting for any engineering work these days. Insurances too. If you're not a proper engineer, it will be much harder to obtain proper PI insurance. Insurance companies have gotten hip to that.

The "Professional Engineer" thing is a thing in Australia. If you have the right qualifications and experience you can apply to the relevant engineering top level body (mostly Engineers Australia, the less said about whom, the better), to be assessed and approved as a Chartered Professional Engineer, CPE. There are high bars to get over and a requirement for CPD to maintain it. The RPEQ thing is similar-ish, in that you have to demonstrate and maintain, but the bars are a little lower. It is required to be RPEQ in order to sign off as an engineer on any engineering design in Queensland. The other states haven't fully followed suit yet.

There's "engineering" and there's "engineering". Being an engineer that signs off on timber (or even steel) frames for housing projects, council creek crossing bridges, etc, is a flavour of civil engineering that barely warrants the name, description and degree. That would be soul crushing work anyway. Being an automotive engineer working in the space where you have to sign off on modifications to cars and trucks would also be similarly soul crushing. At least partly because of the level of clientelle, their expecations, depths of bank balance, etc.

And that brings us to your second question.

No, we do not have professional engineers "do vehicle inspections". Well, not the regular roadworthies, etc etc. That's done by mechanics. There might be some vehicle standards engineers at the various state govco inspection stations where cars go to get defects cleared and so on, but that's because they (the cars) are there specifically for defect inspection and clearance and so the stakes are a little higher than on an annual lights and brakes working check.

But, if you modify a vehicle in Australia, you have to get it engineered. A suitably qualified (and effectively licensed, which I will get back to) automotive engineer will have to go over the application, advise on what would be required to make the mods legal, supervise some parts of the work, inspect and test the results, and sign off.

The "licensed" aspect comes from there being a list of approved engineers to do these things in each state. They have to jump through hoops set up by the govco vehicle standards divisions that mean only the suitably qualified can offer to and approve such mods.

I have engineer in my job title

One of or motto's though is "we make and we break"

[Duncan]

34 minutes ago, The Bogan said:

I have engineer in my job title

One of or motto's though is "we make and we break"

Actually that's a good point, shouldn't you be in FNQ putting up a bridge for the Bruce Highway?

[The Bogan]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

Actually that's a good point, shouldn't you be in FNQ putting up a bridge for the Bruce Highway?

Not currently, I'm at the school where we teach people to build bridges and other fun things that involve making, or breaking things

[TurboTapin]

2 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

This is actually 2 whole different trains of thought that need to be addressed separately.

No, as Matt says above, "Engineer" is not a directly protected title. A lot of guys who just do mechanical design via CAD, with or without even some sort of associate diploma in engineering, often have the job title of "Design Engineer". A train driver can probably still describe themselves as an engineer.

But, to usefully get employment with anyone as a proper engineer, you're going to have to have at least the necessary and relevant degree qualification. You're not going to get a job as an electrical engineer if you have a chem eng degree, unless you can demonstrate x number of years of working in that capacity, sufficient knowledge, etc. Having the degree is at least in indication that you've seen the relevant text books, even if you haven't read them (like pretty much the last 10 years of graduates!).

To be a self employed engineer.....you could get away with quite a lot pretending that you're suitably qualified, without actually being a proper engineer. But, you will find yourself unable to work for a large section of the client space because a lot demand CVs and capability statements when considering contracting for any engineering work these days. Insurances too. If you're not a proper engineer, it will be much harder to obtain proper PI insurance. Insurance companies have gotten hip to that.

The "Professional Engineer" thing is a thing in Australia. If you have the right qualifications and experience you can apply to the relevant engineering top level body (mostly Engineers Australia, the less said about whom, the better), to be assessed and approved as a Chartered Professional Engineer, CPE. There are high bars to get over and a requirement for CPD to maintain it. The RPEQ thing is similar-ish, in that you have to demonstrate and maintain, but the bars are a little lower. It is required to be RPEQ in order to sign off as an engineer on any engineering design in Queensland. The other states haven't fully followed suit yet.

There's "engineering" and there's "engineering". Being an engineer that signs off on timber (or even steel) frames for housing projects, council creek crossing bridges, etc, is a flavour of civil engineering that barely warrants the name, description and degree. That would be soul crushing work anyway. Being an automotive engineer working in the space where you have to sign off on modifications to cars and trucks would also be similarly soul crushing. At least partly because of the level of clientelle, their expecations, depths of bank balance, etc.

And that brings us to your second question.

No, we do not have professional engineers "do vehicle inspections". Well, not the regular roadworthies, etc etc. That's done by mechanics. There might be some vehicle standards engineers at the various state govco inspection stations where cars go to get defects cleared and so on, but that's because they (the cars) are there specifically for defect inspection and clearance and so the stakes are a little higher than on an annual lights and brakes working check.

But, if you modify a vehicle in Australia, you have to get it engineered. A suitably qualified (and effectively licensed, which I will get back to) automotive engineer will have to go over the application, advise on what would be required to make the mods legal, supervise some parts of the work, inspect and test the results, and sign off.

The "licensed" aspect comes from there being a list of approved engineers to do these things in each state. They have to jump through hoops set up by the govco vehicle standards divisions that mean only the suitably qualified can offer to and approve such mods.

Each province differs a bit but we only do mandatory vehicle inspections here for heavy vehicles (Think Ford F350 and up). Those inspections are done by mechanics that are approved by the government. Besides that, it's a free for all as long as the car looks stock. 

I asked because I love seeing how engineering differs from country to country. Here in Canada, all designs must be stamped and signed before they can be brought to fruition. (I.E Bridges, structures, Electrical panels, machines, literally everything shy of a wooden table) This can only be done by a professional engineer or professional engineering technologist. Both are protected titles, but the latter having more of a limited scope in what they can stamp. To become a professional engineer, you must complete a 4-5 year bachelors degree in your field of engineering, be part of an engineering order and undergo 4 years of apprenticeship, testing and mandatory continues education. Same story for engineering technologists, but a 3 year associates degree in some form of engineering technology will suffice. If you do not comply, or pretend you're an engineer or technologist, off to jail you go. If you stamp a design that fails, off to jail you go. If you stamp a design that fails and kills someone (I.E Bridge collapse) Off to jail you go for a very long time, your family will be ridiculed on the news, neighbours will surround your home with pitch forks and your dog will disown you. 

Same for specialised trades... Example Electricians must undergo 1.5 years of post high school education, 4 years of apprenticeship, testing and hold proper licences. It's for the best, but then we also wonder why we're so short on engineers and tradesmen haha. We also have professional engineers who were only school smart but have no idea how a drill works. They generally go straight into management roles out of school which is also for the best. 

Edited February 11 by TurboTapin