The architect on 301 Osborn, originally contracted for investor-facing CAD floor plans, sent back a full schematic design set and his own building code synopsis, way beyond scope, plus a request to also take on the project's interior design.
I forwarded the whole thing to my partner for a shared read instead of answering alone. He came back and named the real complication honestly.
An architect who quietly expands his own scope and then asks to be paid and trusted for the extra work, that's a normal, human thing to do. Not automatically a red flag. But it still deserves a clear-eyed answer, not a reflexive yes just because the work itself looked good.
My partner responded with real enthusiasm for the design work while leaving the interiors question open instead of deciding on the spot.
Good work from someone who's overstepped their contract still deserves a real answer, not an automatic one.
Two partners deciding together beats one person making the call alone.