Complaining about an architect

Undervalued

discontent64 said:

Undervalued said:

However, it is a bit different from the above professions in that you can still legally provide many of the services usually done by architects without being one, but that is another matter.

Thanks for this but your comments re services carried out by someone who is not an architect - just to muddy the water the architect withdrew from the project and a co-director designated "architectural technician" has been handling it for the last 13 months, STILL the same bad service and false reassurances (eg it will be ready soon).  What redress will we have against him?  
All we want is for our project to be completed and to go for planning permission and listed building consent.  Nearly all of the work was done by end 2019, why are they taking over a year to do this?

None, your claim is against the firm you engaged, not individual members of staff or sub-contractors. 

If this technician did work that can only legally be done by an architect then that is a regulatory matter. A bit like if a nurse at your GP's practice issued you with a drug that can only legally be prescribed by a doctor. The nurse could be struck off, as too could the doctor if they knowingly allowed it to happen at their practice.

Ultimately you are going to have to trust some suitably qualified person to say that the architect is at fault. You will most likely have to pay for that opinion. If the opinion is in your favour you will almost certainly win any claim and be able to recover the cost of the opinion. I am afraid there is no other answer.

discontent64

Thank you for the comments.  It is as I suspected RIBA are a trade association for architects.  Found this on MoneySaving expert - our next stop will be the ARB
"ARB and RIBA
We are often asked what the difference is between us, the Architects Registration Board, and the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). Both organisations are connected with architects, but we have different roles.
Among other things, the RIBA promotes architecture through prize schemes and campaigning, and maintains a leading library of architecture books and papers. It is one of several professional organisations for architects. Architects may choose to become members of RIBA or any of the other professional organisations for architects. Not all architects choose to become members.
We are the regulator of architects in the UK. We keep the UK Register of Architects, and anyone who wants to offer their services as an architect must register with us."
The ARB is the statutory body:  "ARB was established by an Act of Parliament - the Architects Act 1997 (the “Act”) - and is the statutory regulator of architects in the UK. ARB’s other statutory duties are contained in the Act, and cover five main areas:  Prescribing the qualifications needed to become an architect in the UK  Keeping the UK Register of Architects  Ensuring that architects meet our standards for conduct and practice  Investigating complaints about an architect’s conduct or competence  Making sure that only people on our register offer their services as an architect  Acting as the UK’s competent authority for architects"

All we want is for the architect to complete the contract, much having already been done.  Sigh

Mickey666

Seems like there are a couple of issues here; the architect not designing to the OPs brief and the timescale or the delay in progress. 
If the OP now has a suitable design, based on the builder's input, then a pragmatic solution might be to simply fire the architect and handle the LBC and PP applications personally.  It's not as difficult as it might seem.  Also, has the local council historic buildings officer (sometimes called 'conservation officer') actually seen the proposed plans? 

My approach has always been to discuss any such LBC work with the HBO before submission so that they can informally approve the design and, if necessary, have their input to it in the context of the listed building.  Once the HBO is on-side then the formal application should be a simple 'rubber-stamping' exercise, because no one else in the council will overrule the HBO, given that they are the designated expert.

discontent64

Good idea.  We have done that in the past.  We are still waiting for the final plans (nearly complete) and the Heritage Statement (the latter being the major sticking point).  Apparently the HBO has already been approached but that is as much as we know.  Where we live our local HBO role has now gone to Manchester (not that it was any great hardship as the local incumbent was not easy to work with)

ComicGeek

Undervalued said:

discontent64 said:

Undervalued said:

However, it is a bit different from the above professions in that you can still legally provide many of the services usually done by architects without being one, but that is another matter.

Thanks for this but your comments re services carried out by someone who is not an architect - just to muddy the water the architect withdrew from the project and a co-director designated "architectural technician" has been handling it for the last 13 months, STILL the same bad service and false reassurances (eg it will be ready soon).  What redress will we have against him?  
All we want is for our project to be completed and to go for planning permission and listed building consent.  Nearly all of the work was done by end 2019, why are they taking over a year to do this?

If this technician did work that can only legally be done by an architect then that is a regulatory matter. A bit like if a nurse at your GP's practice issued you with a drug that can only legally be prescribed by a doctor. The nurse could be struck off, as too could the doctor if they knowingly allowed it to happen at their practice.

Anyone can do the same work as an architect, they just can't call themselves an Architect without undertaking the relevant training, registration with ARB and ongoing professional development etc. Those who aren't so bothered with the title can take a slightly different route and become an Architectural Technician, but that doesn't mean that they are any worse or better - in fact some of the best people I've worked with are Architectural Technicians as they have understood the small details, rather than having their heads in the clouds like some big thinking Architects.

RIBA is a red herring - they spend more on marketing so consumers think they need to employ RIBA architects, but they are just a trade body. I very much doubt that they will rule against their own members. ARB are the statutory body.

OP - have they agreed to do the changes for free, or is there additional fee? Everyone is very busy at the moment, so unlikely that 'free' work will make it to the top of the pile. I would have sacked them long before now, and not waited so long. Have you set deadlines for issue, or have you just had deadlines set by them?

discontent64

ComicGeek, we have used planning consultants in the past so not particularly fussed about titles (though it is nice to have clarity).  Re RIBA - yes that is our thoughts.  Part of the blurb we got from the architect back in 2017, was that the design may take several iterations.  I get what you are saying re free work.  Hindsight re sacking - yes, but it has been a difficult few years health wise and now we are too far down the road (and nearly £6K broke), but we really did think they were the right architect for the job.  This is the second architect on the project (having interviewed around 4), the first having been sacked.  Re deadlines - yes, both ways and still nothing.  Unfortunately, it is unlikely that we will try the project again if we don't get anything out of this (will probably move, which will be a great shame).  So, now just looking for a way to put a rocket up their proverbials and get the plans and Heritage Statement (the latter first promised 5 months ago), will ARB do that?

Undervalued

discontent64 said:

Thank you for the comments.  It is as I suspected RIBA are a trade association for architects.  Found this on MoneySaving expert - our next stop will be the ARB
"ARB and RIBA
We are often asked what the difference is between us, the Architects Registration Board, and the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). Both organisations are connected with architects, but we have different roles.
Among other things, the RIBA promotes architecture through prize schemes and campaigning, and maintains a leading library of architecture books and papers. It is one of several professional organisations for architects. Architects may choose to become members of RIBA or any of the other professional organisations for architects. Not all architects choose to become members.
We are the regulator of architects in the UK. We keep the UK Register of Architects, and anyone who wants to offer their services as an architect must register with us."
The ARB is the statutory body:  "ARB was established by an Act of Parliament - the Architects Act 1997 (the “Act”) - and is the statutory regulator of architects in the UK. ARB’s other statutory duties are contained in the Act, and cover five main areas:  Prescribing the qualifications needed to become an architect in the UK  Keeping the UK Register of Architects  Ensuring that architects meet our standards for conduct and practice  Investigating complaints about an architect’s conduct or competence  Making sure that only people on our register offer their services as an architect  Acting as the UK’s competent authority for architects"

All we want is for the architect to complete the contract, much having already been done.  Sigh

OK, I was somewhat out of date. My dealings with the RIBA were pre 1997. About 30 years ago I attended a meeting in their council chamber at their high prestigious headquarters. The council chamber resembled the High Court! I would certainly agree they have lofty ideas.

However it doesn't change the main thrust of my comments. A dispute about one particular job is unlikely to be a regulatory matter (although it could be under some circumstances).

I still feel you will struggle to get anywhere without an expert opinion from somebody at least as well qualified as your architect