In Costrini v. Hansen Architects, 247 Ga. App. 136 (543 SE2d 760) (2000), the Court rejected a trial court's ruling that a claim for breach of a written construction contract was subject to the four-year statute of limitation applicable to tort claims for damage to property (OCGA 9-3-30), and held that such a claim was governed by the six-year statute applicable to claims for breach of a written contract. The Court therefore affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants, finding that the plaintiffs had failed to file suit within six years after the construction work was substantially completed. Id. at 137 (1). Although the defendant in Costrini was an architect, there is nothing in the opinion that suggests the plaintiffs had sued him in his capacity as an architect, for professional malpractice. Specifically, there was no indication that the plaintiffs' claim was based on the parties' contract for the defendant's professional, architectural services, or his failure to perform such professional services in accordance with the applicable standard of care. Rather, it appears that plaintiffs had sued the defendant in his capacity as a general contractor, for ordinary negligence and fraud.