architects

rwster

Has anyone got any good or bad experiences or been ripped of by architects,thinking of having an extension to my kitchen ,What questions should i ask them, THanks

Chabsy

i would'nt bother get the builder to do a design and build it will be much cheaper and you wont have the builder moaning about YOUR architect.

richardw

The most important thing is being definitive about what you want the extension to be, otherwise known as your requirements. Start making a list of your requirements, secondly start to find possible building contractors to form a list of at least 3 to give you 3 prices to consider.
Architect's charge fees, have a nasty habit of imposing things that they like for their ego and spending your money and blaming others than themselves when things go wrong and over budget.

RedOnRed

Chabsy wrote:

i would'nt bother get the builder to do a design and build it will be much cheaper and you wont have the builder moaning about YOUR architect.

And since when has a builder been a qualified architect? Becoming a qualified architect is almost as hard as becoming a medical doctor. So unless you want something the size of shed built...I would always hire an experienced architect.

By the way, my dad's one - so I know sort of first hand the immense work that goes into designing something.

lush_walrus

rwster wrote:

Has anyone got any good or bad experiences or been ripped of by architects,thinking of having an extension to my kitchen ,What questions should i ask them, THanks

Highly unlikely you will ever experience an Architect ripping you off, these are professional people whom have studied for a very long period all of which can be lost in an instant if you do not follow the guidlines set down by either governing body (ARB and RIBA). I personally am a qualified architect.

To be able to call yourself an architect, you need to have studied three parts, firstly a 3 year degree, followed by a year working in industry (during which time you have to keep log books and are not signed off unless the details of your experience are varied enough to qualify), then a 2 year diploma, then another year working filling log books again, followed by a year of studying law, business etc. A very long haul route to becoming a qualified architect, Im sure you would agree. On top of that, it has been recognised as being one of the most difficult courses to get through, again to give you an idea, when I began my degree we had a class of 50, by the end 14 of us passed, so as you can imagine, by the time an Architect has fully qualified the numbers have frittered down considerably. Following registering as an architect, we then have to continually carry out education under CPD for the whole time we practice.

So thats to give you an idea of how an architect becomes an architect and the effort which the person goes through. From the moment we register, we have to abide by our governing bodies guidelines, if we fail to (which ripping off would most certainly be considered to be a fail to abide), then the architect is taken infront of a jury and the case examined. An architect risks loosing ALL that they have worked for and the end of their career. So ask yourself, would you rip someone off after all of that? It really isnt worth anyones while to attempt to rip anyone off is it!

If you do go ahead and employ an architect, then read the legislation on https://www.arb.org.uk and if you are looking to find an architect https://www.RIBA.org and you will be able to seach for an architect who specialises in the type of work you are proposing and in your area.

My only piece of advise is, if you do go the route of getting a builder/surveyor to draw the plans for you, you generally will not get the work carried out any cheaper than if an architect drew them for you. If the extension is in any way controversial an architect is also able to advise and communicate with the planners, as that is something which they are trained for.

If you want to claw back some money, try to find yourself a partially qualified student ie someone who has completely their degree, and is studying their diploma or just finished. If you can find a student, they will be more than capable of carrying out the work, but will do it in their spare time and as such be able to charge a cheap rate.

lush_walrus

Chabsy wrote:

i would'nt bother get the builder to do a design and build it will be much cheaper and you wont have the builder moaning about YOUR architect.

Most good builders have a good working relationship with architects, and architects earn any fees they have charged back through contract administration and ensurinng that builders give firm prices and therefore avoid them charging extras left right and centre where reason is missing.

If the OP did want to avoid the architect and builder to not colide, then a simple solution would be to get the architect to draw the existing and proposed drawings, apply for planning permisson then give the builder the responisbility of detailing. Builders are not qualified to carry out the work which an architect does, they are qualified in building! Nor are most contractors I have come across particularily concious of design!

A good contractor is very good at building but this does not mean that they are able to draw up plans, negotiate with planners and nor does it mean they can design!

Chabsy

RedOnRed wrote:

And since when has a builder been a qualified architect? Becoming a qualified architect is almost as hard as becoming a medical doctor. So unless you want something the size of shed built...I would always hire an experienced architect.

By the way, my dad's one - so I know sort of first hand the immense work that goes into designing something.

Maybe I was not clear on what a design and build is or my lack of a comma confused you, but in a design and build the builder employs the architect, you buy the whole package.

Maybe its just me but the architects i deal with on a daily basis dont instill me with confidence and don't seem very good at resolving things. I dont know your Dad though.

lush_walrus

Chabsy wrote:

Maybe I was not clear on what a design and build is or my lack of a comma confused you, but in a design and build the builder employs the architect, you buy the whole package.

Maybe its just me but the architects i deal with on a daily basis dont instill me with confidence and don't seem very good at resolving things. I dont know your Dad though.

Sorry but this is not a design and build contract, a builder NEVER unless he is a developer (and therefore becomes a client) employs an architect. A design and build contract is where the architect designs everything till detailed design stage (after planning permission has been granted and contracts between the contractor and the client are signed). At that point the project is signed over to the contractor and the contractor designs and specifies the details. Very different situation to what you are describing Im afraid and will still NOT save any money!

The advantage of having an architect is exactly what you say they dont do, an architect on site is the go between separating the client from the contractor and ensuring that the quality of the work is as specified and stays in budget! I have quite a significant amount of experience on site, and not to be offensive but I assume your position within contracting might not be site forman, as ultimately NO ONE refers to contractors as builders, when running a job on site buiilders are always refered to as contractors! Simple terminology to reflect the fact that they are under contract.

Hope this makes it clearer for you!