Moncton Structural Engineer Surrenders Licence After Building Design Deficiencies Raise Public-Safety Concerns

MONCTON, N.B. — A Moncton structural engineer has agreed to surrender her licence to practise engineering after acknowledging deficiencies in her professional work that raised serious public-safety concerns involving multiple buildings in New Brunswick.

Engineer Hélène Thériault has also agreed to pay approximately $75,000 in fines and costs as part of disciplinary proceedings connected to structural engineering work she completed on a number of properties.

The case has drawn particular attention in Dieppe, where approximately 22 buildings have been linked to engineering work completed by Thériault.

The situation has led to structural inspections, temporary shoring and permanent reinforcement work on several properties as officials, building owners and engineers worked to determine whether the structures were safe and what corrective measures were required.

At least 12 of the affected buildings in Dieppe have reportedly received permanent structural reinforcement, while at least one building had remained temporarily supported as remediation work continued.

The case has become one of the more significant engineering and building-safety matters in the Greater Moncton area, particularly because the concerns involve structures already occupied or in use.

What Went Wrong?

Structural engineers are responsible for designing and approving critical components of buildings, including elements that help ensure structures can safely carry their expected loads.

Those calculations can involve foundations, beams, columns, walls, roof systems and other structural components.

When a structural design contains deficiencies, the seriousness of the problem can vary considerably.

Some deficiencies may be corrected through reinforcement or additional structural work, while more serious problems can require temporary supports, restricted access or extensive repairs.

In this case, the engineering deficiencies were serious enough to result in professional disciplinary proceedings and concerns about public safety.

The surrender of a professional engineering licence is a significant outcome and means Thériault will no longer be permitted to practise engineering under that licence.

Dieppe Buildings Under Scrutiny

Dieppe has been at the centre of the issue because of the number of buildings associated with the engineer's work.

Municipal officials and property owners have been dealing with assessments and remediation measures intended to ensure affected structures meet appropriate safety standards.

Temporary shoring can be installed when there is concern that a building component may not have sufficient structural capacity. These supports are intended to stabilize a structure while engineers determine what permanent repairs are necessary.

Permanent reinforcement may involve strengthening existing beams, columns or other structural components, depending on the specific deficiencies identified.

For building owners, these types of repairs can be complicated and expensive, particularly when work must be completed after construction has already finished.

Civil Lawsuits Filed

The disciplinary case is also separate from a growing number of civil proceedings.

At least 14 civil lawsuits have reportedly been filed in New Brunswick relating to Thériault's engineering work.

Those lawsuits reportedly seek millions of dollars in damages connected to repair costs, construction deficiencies and other alleged losses.

It is important to note that allegations made in civil lawsuits are not automatically established facts. Claims brought before the courts must still be proven or resolved through settlement or judicial decisions.

The civil cases could continue even after the professional disciplinary proceedings have concluded.

Who Pays for the Repairs?

One of the major questions arising from cases like this is who ultimately bears the cost of fixing structural deficiencies.

Depending on the circumstances, responsibility could potentially involve engineers, engineering firms, developers, contractors, insurers, building owners or other parties involved in a construction project.

Determining responsibility can be complicated.

Construction projects often involve numerous professionals and companies, including architects, engineers, contractors, subcontractors, inspectors and developers.

Civil courts may ultimately be asked to determine whether particular parties were negligent and how financial responsibility should be divided.

For property owners, however, those legal proceedings can take considerable time while repairs may be required much sooner.

Questions About Oversight

The case also raises broader questions about how engineering work is reviewed and how potential structural problems are detected.

Most municipalities rely heavily on qualified professionals when reviewing technical aspects of building projects.

Building permits and municipal inspections provide important oversight, but inspectors do not necessarily recreate every structural calculation performed by an engineer.

Professional engineers therefore carry significant responsibility when they sign and seal engineering drawings.

That professional seal is intended to indicate that the engineer has taken responsibility for the work and that it meets applicable professional and technical standards.

When serious deficiencies are later discovered, regulators can investigate whether those standards were followed.

What Happens to the Buildings?

For residents and property owners, the most immediate concern is not necessarily the disciplinary case itself but whether affected buildings are safe.

Buildings identified as having structural concerns may undergo detailed engineering reviews.

Those reviews can include examining original design drawings, inspecting existing structural components and performing new calculations to determine whether the building can safely support expected loads.

If a deficiency is confirmed, engineers may recommend temporary measures before permanent repairs are completed.

The specific solution depends on the design of each building and the nature of the problem discovered.

Some structures may require relatively limited reinforcement, while others may require more significant reconstruction.

Public Deserves Clear Information

The case demonstrates why transparency is important when structural problems involve occupied buildings.

Residents living in affected properties need to know whether their homes are safe.

Business owners operating from affected buildings need similar assurances.

Property owners also need clear information about what repairs are required, who is responsible for completing those repairs and whether additional inspections will be necessary.

Municipalities also face pressure to ensure that buildings identified through the investigation are appropriately assessed.

One of the important questions going forward will be whether officials believe all affected structures have now been identified.

Professional Accountability

Engineering regulators exist partly to protect the public.

When complaints are made about an engineer's professional work, regulators can investigate whether the engineer met required standards.

Possible outcomes can include reprimands, restrictions on practice, fines, licence suspensions or, in more serious cases, surrender or revocation of a licence.

In this case, the agreement to surrender the engineering licence represents a serious professional consequence.

The approximately $75,000 in fines and costs adds a substantial financial penalty to that outcome.

Questions That Remain

Although the disciplinary proceedings represent an important development, several questions remain.

Are there additional buildings elsewhere in New Brunswick that were designed by the same engineer and still require review?

Have all of the approximately 22 buildings identified in Dieppe now been fully assessed?

How many buildings still require permanent repairs?

Who will ultimately pay for those repairs?

Could property owners face insurance or resale complications because of the structural issues?

And will municipalities or engineering regulators change any procedures as a result of what happened?

Those questions will likely remain important as remediation work and civil cases continue.

Wider Importance for Greater Moncton

Greater Moncton has experienced significant residential and commercial construction growth in recent years.

With that growth comes increased responsibility to ensure buildings are properly designed, inspected and constructed.

Most construction projects are completed safely and without major structural problems.

However, when significant deficiencies are discovered across multiple properties, the issue becomes more than a dispute between individual property owners and an engineer.

It becomes a matter of public confidence in the systems designed to ensure buildings are safe.

For residents, that means confidence that engineers, contractors, municipalities and regulators are all doing their part.

For the engineering profession, it means maintaining standards that protect the public.

And for the owners of affected properties, it means getting clear answers and ensuring necessary repairs are completed.

The surrender of Thériault's licence is a major development, but the broader story is not over.

Structural remediation, civil litigation and questions surrounding the affected buildings could continue for some time.

CanJam News will continue following developments involving the affected properties, remediation work, municipal action and the ongoing civil cases.