AMIRALI JAMAL VISNANI, P.ENG.
Editor's Note: APEGGA Council requires that The PEGG publish
Discipline Committee decisions. Following are the details
of a stipulated order of October 23, 2003, involving the
During the course of an investigation conducted by APEGGA’s
Investigative Committee into the conduct of Amirali Jamal
Visnani, P.Eng., concerning services provided to Teddy Bear
Daycare of Edmonton, Alberta, Mr. Visnani had freely and
voluntarily admitted and agreed with the attached facts and
findings presented by the Investigative Committee.
Since Mr. Visnani has admitted to conduct that constitutes
unprofessional conduct, there is no need to refer the matter
to the Discipline Committee for a formal hearing. In accordance
with Section 52 of the Engineering, Geological and Geophysical
Professions Act, APEGGA’s Investigative Committee is
recommending the attached orders that it considers appropriate.
As the case manager designated by the Discipline Committee
to review the matter, Rick Imai, P.Eng., agrees with those
orders. During his discussion of the orders with Mr. Visnani,
Mr. Visnani confirmed that he, also, agrees with the orders.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 52 of the Engineering,
Geological and Geophysical Professions Act, the orders have
the same force and effect as if they had been made by the
Discipline Committee following a formal hearing.
As a result of its investigation and based on the evidence
and information that had come to the attention of the Investigative
Committee, the Investigative Committee proposes the following.
I AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., was , at all material times,
a member in good standing with APEGGA.
2. In March, 2003 APEGGA received a complaint from the City
of Edmonton Safety Codes Officer regarding the conduct of
Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng.
3. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., although registered as a member,
did not engage in the practice of engineering between 1989
and 1998. His professional experience did not include structural
engineering. In 1998 he applied for and received life membership
status with APEGGA, which he has maintained to the present.
4. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., was part owner of a daycare
in North Edmonton which operated and leased space on the
basement level of a walk-up apartment building. In January
and February 2003, Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., submitted plans
to the City of Edmonton in support of an application for
a building permit to renovate and expand the day care’s
space. Notwithstanding that he was a life member at the time,
the plans he submitted bore the professional seal of Amir
J. Visnani, P.Eng. The building permit was approved by the
City of Edmonton.
5. The proposed work to be done included the removal of
several walls in the daycare’s space. Prior to commencing
the work, Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng. undertook a cursory investigation
of the building structure to determine the placement of beams
and other structural elements. His investigation included
the observation of a beam in one location only. He then assumed
the other structural elements.
6. The demolition/renovation work commenced on Wednesday,
March 5, 2003, by a contractor working under the supervision
of Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng. The work proceeded until March
8, 2003, at which time it was noted that the ceiling was
deflecting. A tenant in the suite above complained to the
building manager that the floor in her suite was deflecting,
which deflection was caused by the removal of load-bearing
walls under the supervision of Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng.
7. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., initiated steps to stabilize
the structure by replacing studs, however the building owner/manager
directed him to cease work and to leave the premises. The
structure was stabilized under the supervision of a professional
engineer selected by the owner and paid for voluntarily by
8. The City of Edmonton Safety Codes Officer attended in
response to the complaint by the tenant, at which time remedial
work had already commenced.
1. That the conduct of Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng, constitutes
unskilled practice of the profession and unprofessional conduct
in the following respects:
a. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., did not give proper consideration
for the possible consequences of his actions and created
a situation that was potentially dangerous. His conduct resulted
in property damage and risked serious injury and death, all
by violating APEGGA Code of Ethics Rule of Conduct #1;
b. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., engaged in the practice of structural
engineering without training or experience to do so, thereby
constituting breach of APEGGA Code of Ethics Rule of Conduct
c. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., engaged in professional practice
at a time when he knew or ought to have known that he should
not be engaging in the practice of engineering as a life
member, thereby constituting breach of APEGGA Code of Ethics
Rule of Conduct #10.
1. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., be reprimanded for unskilled
practice of the profession of engineering.
2. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., be reprimanded for unprofessional
3. Amir J. Visnani, P.Eng., be reprimanded for engaging
in the practice of engineering when not entitled to do so
by virtue of his registration status.