Previous PCC decisions

Key:
UPC: Unacceptable professional conduct
SPI: Serious professional incompetence

---

Date: 14 – 15 November 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) Failed to issue the Complainant with adequate terms of engagement in respect of the project, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; (2) Failed to adequately communicate with the Complainant in respect of the project; (3) Failed to respond to the Complainant’s complaint in respect of the project; (4) Failed to co-operate fully and/or promptly with ARB in respect of a complaint despite requests of 18 March 2021, 25 March 2021 and 1 April 2021; (5) Failed to provide the ARB with evidence of his professional indemnity insurance when requested to do so on 19 February 2021; (6) Failed to ensure that he had professional indemnity insurance which extended to work undertaken outside his main employment, contrary to Standard 8.2 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £1,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 20-27 June, 28 September, and 4 November 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: 1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; 2) The Respondent provided inadequate construction stage design information and drawings; 3) The Respondent did not carry out his role as contract administrator adequately in that he: a) Did not use an appropriate form of contract; b) Did not complete the contract correctly; c) Did not issue a pay less notice on the Complainant’s behalf; d) Did not follow contract remedies to terminate the contract on the Complainant’s behalf; 4) The Respondent did not ensure construction was carried out in accordance with Building Regulations; 5) The Respondent did not observe Statutory obligations in respect of: a) Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015; and b) Control of Asbestos at work Regulations 2012 and c) The Party Wall Act.
Penalty: £1,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 26-30 September and 24 October 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: 1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainants, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; 2) The Registered Person did not carry out his professional work adequately and with regard to relevant technical and/or professional standards and policies; 3) The Registered Person did not deal with a complaint appropriately, contrary to Standard 10 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £1,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 19-22 April 2022
Nature of offence: Nature of offence: 1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; 2) (a) did not adequately progress the project in accordance with timescales agreed with his client; (b) adequately communicate with his client by not responding to correspondence at all from 7 May 2021 onwards; 3) did not deal with a complaint appropriately, contrary to Standard 10 of the Architects Code; 4) did not co-operate fully with his regulatory requirements contrary to Standard 11 of the Architects Code; and 5) did not provide evidence of adequate Professional Indemnity Insurance cover to the ARB when requested to do so contrary to Standard 8 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Six month suspension

---

Date: 12 September 2023
Nature of offence: (1) The Registered Person sought to enter into an agreement which was intended to prevent the Referrer from submitting and/or proceeding with a complaint to the ARB; (2)The Registered Person’s actions at 1 lacked integrity.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 10 September 2023
Nature of offence: (1) The Architect failed to adequately advise his clients regarding Listed Building Consent; (3)The Architect failed to deal with the complaint within the timeframes as outlined in Standard 10 of the Architects Code; (4)The Architect failed to provide adequate terms of engagement contrary to 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 22 August 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Registered Person did not provide adequate written terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; (2) The Registered Person: a) did not complete work for his client without undue delay; b) did not keep his client informed about the progress of the work contrary to Standard 6.3; (3) The Registered Person did not: a)  provide adequate specification notes and/or technical information in line with the client’s requirements when issuing these documents on 7 March 2021; b) did not adequately revise the specification notes and/or technical information on more than one occasion when issues were identified by the client. (4) The Registered Person did not deal with a complaint appropriately, contrary to Standard 10 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 25-29 July 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: 1) The Respondent did not appropriately manage his financial affairs in accordance with Standard 9.1 of the Architects Code in that he;
(a) for the year ending 31 March 2016:
(i) did not register for VAT despite receiving advice from an accountant to do so; and/or
(ii) did not submit a VAT return; and/or
(iii) did not pay to the HMRC VAT which was due;
(b) for the year ending 31 March 2017:
(i) did not register for VAT despite receiving advice from an accountant to do so; and/or
(ii) did not submit a VAT return; and/or
(iii) did not pay to HMRC VAT which was due;
(c) continued to provide services without VAT registration up to and/or including 31 March 2017 despite advice that he had exceeded the registration threshold
(d) did not ensure that the company had sufficient resources at the time of liquidation to discharge VAT liability;
2) The Respondent made inaccurate statements during his disqualification appeal proceedings in that he stated that he had not ever been the subject of a complaint to a professional body, or words to that effect, when that was not the case;
3) The Respondent’s actions at particular 1(a), (b), (c), (d) lacked integrity;
4) The Respondent’s actions at particular 2(c) (ii) lacked integrity.
and that by doing so, he acted in breach of Standards 1.1 and 9.1 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2010 and 2017 (“the Code”).
Penalty: £2,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 28 July 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: did not appropriately manage a conflict of interest; did not supervise and/or ensure that work was carried out in accordance with Health and Safety Regulations; acted contrary to the requirements of Standard 9.2 of the Architects Code in that Companies C and D, both of which he was a director of, were each subject to separate Employment Tribunal judgements and failed to pay the financial orders as instructed by those judgements and failed to notify the Registrar of the judgements within 28 days.
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 5-8 October 2020, 8 January 2021, 1-5 and 8-10 February 2021, 8-10 and 26 March 2021, 20 April 2021, 13 and 24-25 May 2021 ,12 and 13 July 2021
Nature of offence: UPC:  1. did not provide adequate terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; 2. did not produce an adequate design in line with: (b) Building Regulation requirements; 3. did not have effective systems in place to ensure that his practice was run professionally and that projects were regularly monitored and reviewed, contrary to Standard 4.1 of the Architects Code; 4. did not ensure that he had adequate and/or appropriate professional indemnity insurance;
Penalty: 12-month suspension order

---

Date: 25 May 2023
Nature of offence: UPC: the Registered Person did not provide any and/or any adequate terms of engagement to the Referrer, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 20-21 March 2022 and 10 May 2022
Nature of offence: UPC:1. In respect of the first property and his client (the First Complainant) failed a) to produce adequate Building Regulations drawings in relation to an extension at the property; b) To provide the First Complainant with adequate terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; c) To communicate adequately with the First Complainant; 2. In respect of the second property and his client (the Second Complainant) failed: a) To provide the Second Complainant with adequate terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; c) To deal adequately with a complaint by the Second Complainant contrary to Standard 10 of the Architects Code and that by doing so, he acted in breach of Standards 4 and 10 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 24 April 2023
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) In respect of Project A, the Registered Person did not provide any and/or any adequate terms of engagement to the Referrer, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code;(2)In respect of Project B, the Registered Person did not provide and and/or any adequate terms of engagement to the Referrer, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 27 March 2023
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Respondent held himself out as, and allowed his clients to understand that he was, a licensed architect in California, when he was not; (2) On 5 December 2017 the Superior Court of the State of California found that the Respondent performed services that required a California architect’s license, despite not holding such license; (3) The Respondent’s actions at particular 1 were misleading.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 15-17 March 2021
Nature of offence: (1) did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant, contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; (2) did not adequately advise the Complainant in relation to the development of a dormer in their property in that he: (a) Did not confirm with the Local Authority whether Planning Permission was required and/or whether the design would be acceptable under Permitted Development.(3) did not provide an adequate and/or appropriate response to a complaint in compliance with Standard 10 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: 12 month suspension

---

Date: 13 March 2023
Nature of offence: UPC (1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 4 February 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; (2) The Respondent did not produce adequate drawings and/or documentation at Stage 3 and/or Stage 4 of the project.
Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 14 December 2022
Nature of offence: (1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 14 December 2022
Nature of offence: (1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 22-26 November 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; (2) The Respondent failed to adequately communicate with the client in relation to (i) site visits and other meetings and (ii) issues affecting cost and fees; (3) The Respondent failed to deal with a complaint and dispute appropriately; and that in doing so he acted in breach of Standards 4.4, 6.3, 10.2 and 10.3 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2017.
Penalty: Nine month suspension

---

Date: 1 November 2018
Nature of offence: UPC and SPI: Provided a seriously incompetent design in relation to a gable wall and failed to respond adequately to communications regarding an issue with his work.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 13 October 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Registered Person did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Referrer, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 28 – 30 September 2020
Nature of offence:  UPC: failed to adequately or at all inspect the site in accordance with the Architects Certificate dated 22 May 2017; failed adequately or at all to co-operate fully and promptly with ARB; acted inappropriately in that he attempted to enter into a financial settlement with the Complainant on the condition that she withdraw her complaint from ARB.
Penalty: One year suspension

---

Date: 2 October 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to keep clients adequately informed of matters affecting costs; failed to act appropriately following the termination of his engagement by making excessive demands for payments for work; and failed to pay fees owed following the decision of an adjudicator.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 21 September 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: 1)The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainants, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; 2) The Respondent did not adequately communicate with the Complainants in that he did not respond to correspondence in a timely manner.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 20 September 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: Criminal Conviction: Committed an act outraging public decency by behaving in an indecent manner.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 15, 16 and 21 September 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: 1)The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainants, contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; 2) The Respondent did not adequately communicate with the Complainants in that he did not respond to correspondence in a timely manner.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 17 September 2021
Nature of offence: SPI: (1) failed to identify if a damp roof and time decay survey had been carried out in respect of the property and, in absence of such a survey, failed to instruct one prior to further work continuing in terms of his appointment; (2) failed to carry out adequate inspections before signing a Professional Consultant’s Certificate dated 20 October 2015.
Penalty: £2,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 31 August 2022
Nature of offence: UPC: 1(a) The Respondent failed to issue adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant in respect of the project the property, contrary to Standard 4 of the Architects Code 2010; 1(b) The Respondent failed to deal appropriately with the Complainant’s complaint in respect of the project at the property contrary to Standard 10 of the Architects Code 2017.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 17 August 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; and (2) did not prepare accurate drawings, measurements and plans in respect of a loft conversion.
Penalty: £1000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 17‐20 November 2020 and 06 January 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1)She failed to supervise staff members and/or those carrying out work for Studio 47 Architects adequately and/or at all; (2) she failed to ensure the honest promotion of services at Studio 47 Architects in that she allowed unregistered staff members to refer themselves publicly as ‘architects’; (3) her actions at particular (2) were misleading and/or lacked integrity; and that by doing so she contravened Standards 1.2, 2.1, 3.1, 3.4 and 4 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2017
Penalty: Six month suspension

---

Date: 23-24 April 2018

Nature of offence: UPC: failed adequately, or at all, to undertake his professional work without undue delay; failed adequately, or at all, to cooperate with the Architects Registration Board with regard to a complaint about his professional work; failed to enter into a written agreement with his client prior to undertaking any professional work; failed to carry out his work faithfully, conscientiously and with due regard to relevant technical and professional standards; made representations to his client which in inaccurate, untrue and misleading; failed to hold adequate insurance; failed to provide evidence of Professional Indemnity Insurance; failed to ensure that he had a complaint handling procedure in place; failed adequately, or at all, to deal with a complaint from his client regarding his professional work

Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 6 March 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: Did not provide terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; Did not produce adequate designs and drawings for the purposes of obtaining a fixed price from a contractor; Did not deal with a complaint about their professional work appropriately; Did not have adequate and appropriate insurance in place contrary to Standard 8 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: 12 month suspension

---

Date: 20 July 2020 and 1 to 4 March 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1)She sent a number of abusive and/or offensive communications to Neighbour A between 9 – 13 January 2018; and (2) she sent a number of abusive and/or offensive communications to Neighbour B between 10 – 11 January 2018; and that by doing so she contravened Standards 9.2 and 12.1 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2017
Penalty: £2000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 8 December 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Respondent did not adequately communicate with the client by not responding to correspondence in a timely manner
Penalty: Reprimand  

---

Date:  2-4 September 2020 and 23 November 2020
Nature of offence:  UPC: failed to carry out his work without undue delay contrary to standard 6 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £1500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 15 November 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Respondent did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 9-12 November 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: Issued a Practical Completion Certificate with an incorrect and fabricated issue date and completion date, knew that the issue dates on all of the certificates were incorrect, issued the Practical Completion Certificate when he was not party to any contract in relation to the building, his actions lacked integrity and were dishonest.
Penalty: £2,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 3 November 2017
Nature of offence: Criminal Conviction
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 23 and 26-27 October 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: did not deliver a professional service to his client without undue delay; did not deal with a complaint about their professional work appropriately; did not co-operate fully and/or promptly with the Regulator.
Penalty: £1250 penalty order

---

Date: 20 October 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 14-16 September 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: Sent a letter to the Complainants dated 18 March 2020 which was inappropriate in that he sought to persuade and/or intimidate the Complainants into withdrawing their complaint to the ARB contrary to Standard 9.2 and 9.5 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 12-13 September 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to inform the client, adequately or at all, that additional fees were being incurred on an hourly rate and accumulating during the production of revised sketch proposals
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 9 September 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) did not provide any and/or adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code and (2) did not prepare adequate designs and drawings for the purposes of planning.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7-9 September 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to issue the Complainant with adequate terms of engagement; failed to deal adequately, or at all, with a complaint; failed to co-operate fully and promptly with the ARB in respect of a complaint.
Penalty: £1,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 29 June 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide adequate terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12 June 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: was disqualified from acting as a company director as of 12 September 2016; failed to report to the Architects Registration Board that he was the director of M&B Architects Limited, which was wound up on 9 March 2015 and he was disqualified from acting as a company director from 12 September 2016
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 12 March 2020
Nature of offence: (a) did not manage costs and valuations competently or at all; and (b) Issued a Practical Completion Certificate when it was not appropriate to do so. Her actions were misleading and dishonest and that by doing so, she acted in breach of Standards 1, 4 and 6 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2017 (“the Code”).
Penalty: 6 month suspension

---

Date: 2-3 September 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately covered the terms of engagement as set out in standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; Failed to carry out an adequate tender process; Failed to carry out work in relation to Building Regulations with due skill and care in that he failed to provide adequate detail in Building Regulations drawings; Failed to undertake his role as Contract Administrator competently.
Penalty: 12 month suspension

---

Date: 3 September 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) did not provide adequate terms of engagement to the Complainant contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 June 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to pay a penalty order following a previous hearing
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 18 June 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: Did not provide his client with adequate advice in relation to planning; Did not deliver a professional service to his client without undue delay.
Penalty: £2,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 16 June 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: did not adequately ensure that architectural work was under the control and management of one or more architects in accordance with Standard 3.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 27 May 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) sent an inappropriate and/or offensive email to a staff member at the Local Authority; (2) The Architect’s actions at particular 1 lacked integrity.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 20 May 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide to his client terms of engagement prior to undertaking any professional work, failed to deal with a complaint adequately, or at all and failed adequately, or at all, to put in place effective procedures for supervising less qualified technical staff and/or for the administration of written terms of engagement.
Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 14-16 May 2018
Nature of offence:  UPC on the basis of the following: A failure to provide adequate terms of engagement; a failure to provide accurate drawings, measurements and plans in accordance with Building Regulations; a failure to carry out agreed services after being paid; a failure to pass on his client’s money to a third party; a failure to communicate effectively and/or deal with a complaint in a timely manner; a failure to have adequate and appropriate insurance; and a failure to deal promptly and openly with his regulator.
Penalty: Two year suspension order

---

Date: 26 March 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide adequate terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; Failed to carry out work in accordance with the terms of engagement and/or agreed instructions; Failed to deal with a complaint and/or dispute appropriately.
Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 22 and 23 February & 13 March 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: In relation to the Infiltration System Test Results Certificate dated 27 June 2013: recorded on the said certificate that he had undertaken the sub-soil percolation tests on 24,25 and 26 June 2013 when he had not done so;  subsequently stated he had undertaken the sub-soil percolation tests on 24,25 and 26 May 2013 when he had not done so; was dishonest in respect of (a) and (b) above, in that he intended to create the impression he had undertaken the sub-soil percolation tests on the said dates when he had not done so. Produced a Final Inspection Certificate submitted on 22 April 2014 which was rejected by Highland Council on grounds which were avoidable.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 2 and 3 March 2017

Nature of offence: UPC: failed to provide complainant with any, or any adequate explanation for non payment and/or an update of her financial position; failed to inform ARB that she failed to pay a judgement debt; failed adequately, or at all, to disclose in writing to the Complainants that in acting as both an architect and a contractor her advice would not longer be impartial; and/or there was a conflict or potential conflict of interest; and/or given the conflict or potential conflict of interest  she required the written confirmation from the Complainant(s) giving informed consent to the Respondent continuing to act.

Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 7-10 December 2020 and 27-28 January 2021
Nature of offence: UPC: (1) The Respondent did not appropriately manage and/or declare a conflict of interest; (2) On or around 2 March 2019 the Respondent published and/or allowed to be published a photograph of the Complainants’ home with location details on Instagram and that photograph was published without the knowledge and/or consent of the Complainants; (3) On an unknown date the Respondent published and/or allowed to be published a photograph of the Complainants’ house with location details on www.houzz.co.uk and did so without the knowledge and/or consent of the Complainants; (4) The Respondent did not ensure that work was carried out in accordance with the relevant technical and/or professional and/or legal standards; and that by doing so, she acted in breach of Standards 1.3, 2.1, 4.3 and 6.1 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2017.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12-13 January 2021
Nature of offence: Criminal Offence: guilty of having been convicted of a criminal offence, other than an offence which has no material relevance to his fitness to practice in that he was convicted on 27 January 2020 of two counts of Assault by Beating contrary to Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1998.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 21 December 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: did not provide adequate terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date:  14 December 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: did not ensure that the junior member of staff was adequately supervised when preparing and submitting the application.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 3-4 December 2020
Nature of offence: UPC:  (1) The Respondent undertook work as an architect without adequate and appropriate Professional Indemnity Insurance in place, contrary to Standard 8 of the Architects Code; (2) Lacked integrity in his actions at Particular 1.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 25-27 November 2020
Nature of offence:  UPC: did not enter into a written agreement with the Complainant which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; failed to effectively communicate with the complainant.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7 and 8 November 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to deal appropriately with a complaint, in that he failed upon reasonable demand to refund an overpayment to his client; failed to ensure that the website of the practice promote his professional services in a truthful and responsible manner; acted without integrity by inappropriately suggesting in a letter to the Board that you would only return the money overpaid to him if the complainant agreed to withdraw the complaint to the Board; he failed to account, or has delayed in accounting, to his client in respect of monies she had overpaid to him; failed to co-operate fully and promptly with Board’s enquiries, in that he failed to provide evidence to the Board that he retained money in a separate client account
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 1 November 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to complete the planning permission application in relation to a development in a prompt and timely manner; withdrew the application for said planning permission in or around November 2013 without the consent of the complainant; failed to advise the complainant that he had withdrawn the application the said planning permission until 8 March 2014; failed to safeguard the complainant’s monies by placing a refund that he had received from the Council on or around November 2013 into his personal current account
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 28-30 October 2020
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 19 October 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed adequately, or at all, to provide an effective and efficient service to his client; failed adequately, or at all, to deal with a dispute and/or complaint appropriately;failed to act with integrity in that:he failed and/or delayed in refunding money to his client after advising her that he would repay it; and/or he made repayment of the money conditional on the removal of adverse feedback
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 7 October 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to manage a conflict, or potential conflict of interest adequately, or at all, in that he: failed to disclose the conflict, or potential conflict of interest in writing and make clear that by acting as both architect and contractor his advice would no longer be impartial; and/or failed to seek written confirmation that all parties involved gave their informed consent to him continuing to act. Failed adequately, or at all, to ensure the build was carried out in accordance with planning permission; and Failed adequately, or at all, to deal with a dispute about his professional work in an appropriate manner contrary to standards 1.1, 1.3, 6.1, 6.4, 10.2 and 10.3  of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £1,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 4 October 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to ensure that the architectural work was under the control and management of one or more architects contrary to standards 3.4 and 4.1 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: £2,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 20 September 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to submit accurate planning application; failed to deal appropriately with a complaint; failed to enter into a written agreement with her client which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code. Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 4 March 2020
Nature of offence: UPC produced drawings that were inaccurate and lacked adequate detail.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 5 December 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide adequate terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 27 November 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide his client with any or adequate terms of engagement in 2014 and or 2017 prior to undertaking any professional work.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 16 November 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to carry out work without undue delay, did not return documents and/or property to which his client was entitled and failed to adequately engage in the handover process, did not make appropriate arrangements to manage the project in his absence, did not deal with a complaint appropriately in that he did not produce a copy of his complaints procedure upon request and failed to co-operate with his regulator with regard to a complaint about his professional work.
Penalty: £2,500 Penalty Order

---

Date: 13 November 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to act with integrity by knowingly copying onto his personal electronic storage device sensitive business information from the business systems of;1. his employer AIM Design Limited and 2. former employer Nicoll Russell Studios. Failed to adequately manage and safeguard client records by downloading on to his personal electronic storage system designs and information relating to work for former clients of Nicoll Russell Studios.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 3 September 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Did not enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately covered the terms of engagement as set out in Standard 4.4 of the Architects Code; failed to communicate effectively with the client in that he submitted an amended application to the local planning authority without agreeing the content with the client.
Penalty: £1,000 Penalty Order

---

Date: 5-6 April 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to communicate adequately with his client; terminated the contract without informing his client
Penalty: 6 month suspension

---

Date: 27 September 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to enter into a written agreement with his client which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12-13 September 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: knowingly permitted the contractor to install a septic tank at the Property without obtaining approval from Building Control
Penalty: 12 month suspension

---

Date: 9 June 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to hold adequate and appropriate insurance in respect of his practice; provided misleading information.
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 26 June 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: That whilst acting as a director of Maya Studio Limited (“the Company”), he failed to ensure that the Company’s professional finances were managed responsibly which resulted in the Company being placed into voluntary liquidation on 4 November 2013; on 3 August 2015, provided an undertaking to the Secretary of State under the Directors Disqualification Act 1986 that he would not act as a director of a company and/or and insolvency practitioner for a period of 3.5 years
Penalty: 12 month suspension

---

Date: 17 and 18 June 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to complete the service that he was contracted to provide.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 2 May 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to avoid any actions or situations which were inconsistent with his professional obligations, in that in seeking to recover unpaid fees he sought to recover disproportionate costs which he ought to have known he could not justify.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7 April 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to maintain adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance.
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 30 March 2015
Nature of offence: Criminal Conviction.
Penalty: Erasure by consent

---

Date: 16, 17, 24 and 25 August 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to act with integrity and avoid any action and/or situations which were inconsistent with his professional obligations in that he failed to submit a compliant building regulations application for a material change of use; failed to carry out his work faithfully and conscientiously and with due regard to relevant technical and professional standards in that he failed to adequately, or at all, comply with the terms and implementation of a planning permission to the basment ground floor flat; failed to adequately, or at all, ensure that the original works were correctly completed to the required standards for a residential conversion; failed adequately, or at all, to supervise the contractor on site.
Penalty: 18 month suspension

---

Date: 28 – 30 January 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: Acted dishonestly in signing off properties as being practically complete when they were not
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 14 – 17 January 2019
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to issue adequate terms of engagement
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 21 December 2018
Nature of Offence: UPC: Did not enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 4-7 December 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to carry out his work faithfully, conscientiously and with skill and care in that he provided his client with incorrect advice regarding the design and/or specification for the glazing units of the oak window frames and specifically that they should be left untreated/unpainted.
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 12 November 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed adequately, or at all, to prepare tender documentation and/or carry out a competitive tender process, failed adequately to communicate with his client, in that he did not keep his client informed of matters affecting costs and  failed to deal with a complaint adequately and/or promptly.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 23 October 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide adequate terms of engagement and failed to keep her client informed of significant delays on the project.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 6 October 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to adequately set out terms of engagement in writing; failed to provide details of his complaints handling procedure; inappropriately restricted his client’s right to make a claim against him; failed to advise his client adequately as to the limitation of liability; made representations to his client which were inaccurate and misleading; failed adequately to deal with a complaint appropriately
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 25-26 September 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to produce a design that was fit for purpose;failed to adequately communicate changes to the agreed design
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 15 September 2014
Nature of offence: Criminal conviction: Eight offences of making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of a child.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 13 – 16 June and 18 – 23 August 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to control the costs of the project; failed to ensure the building works were carried out to an acceptable standard and in accordance with the contract; failed to instruct the contractor to rectify the defects and damage; failed to issue sufficient notes of site visits.
Penalty: 1 year suspension

---

Date: 13 – 16 June and 18 – 23 August 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to control the costs of the project; failed to ensure the building works were carried out to an acceptable standard and in accordance with the contract; failed to instruct the contractor to rectify the defects and damage; failed to issue sufficient notes of site visits; carried out inadequate defect inspections and issued a practical completion certificate despite significant outstanding defects.
Penalty: 1 year suspension

---

Date: 17 August 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed adequately, or at all, to manage or safeguard client records and failed to act with integrity in that he knowingly copied confidential records in to a personal storage account
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 16 August 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: Did not enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 1-2 August 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failing to enter into a written contract before undertaking professional work, and failing to set out adequate terms of engagement.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 6 July 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to communicate adequately; failed to deal adequately with a complaint
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12 June 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: did not enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately covered the terms of engagement contrary to standard 4.4 of the Architects Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7 June 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to disclose to the Architects Registration Board that he had been a director of a company that was the subject of a winding up order
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 5 October 2017, 12-13 February 2018, 16 & 30 April 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to co-operate adequately, or at all, with the ARB’s investigation, in that they failed to respond to the ARB’s correspondence
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 6-8 February 2018
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to have in place a written procedure for the handling of complaints
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 18 September 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to enter into a written agreement with his client prior to undertaking any professional work, which adequately, or at all, covered all matters set out in Standard 4.4 and 4.6 of the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice 2010
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 & 27 July 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to set out terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 1 March 2017
Nature of offence: UPC: failed adequately, or at all, to enter into a written agreement with the client prior to undertaking any professional work
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 15 and 23 December 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to ensure that the architectural work carried out by the practice was under the control and management of a registered architect; failed to ensure that the complainant aware of the identity of the registered architect dealing with the project
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 6 December 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to enter into a written agreement with the client which adequately, or at all, covered matters set out in Standard 4.4 and 4.6 of the 2010 Architects Code; failed to have a written procedure for complaints handling
Penalty: £500 penalty order

---

Date: 14 – 16 November 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to adequately inspect the works, or ensure that the works were adequately inspected prior to the final certificate being issued, in particular failed to ensure that the ongoing dispute regarding faulty pumps had been resolved; made a statement that was dishonest or misleading
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 7 & 8 November 2016

Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to deal appropriately with a complaint, in that he failed upon reasonable demand to refund an overpayment to his client; Failed to ensure that the website of the practice promoted his professional services in a truthful and responsible manner; Acted without integrity by inappropriately suggesting in a letter to the Board dated 11 March 2016 that he would only return the money overpaid to him if the complainant agreed to withdraw the complaint to the Board; For a period since approximately September 2015, he has failed to account, or has delayed in accounting, to his client, in respect of monies she had overpaid to him; Failed to co-operate fully and promptly with the Board’s enquiries, in that he failed to provide evidence to the Board that he retained client money in a separate client account, as required by Standard 7 of the Architects Code, “Trustworthiness and safeguarding clients’ money” when requested to do so in a letter from the Board dated 21 April 2016 and in an email dated 9 May 2016

Penalty: erasure

---

Date: 3 November 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to inform the client, adequately or at all, that additional fees were being incurred on an hourly rate and accumulating during the production of revised sketch proposals
Penalty: £2000 penalty order

---

Date: 24 and 25 October 2016
Nature of offence: SPI: failed to carry out work faithfully, conscientiously and with skill and care in that she failed adequately, or at all, to carry out an accurate survey; produced drawings which were inadequate and misleading; failed adequately, or at all, to comply with the clients’ instructions and/or expectations that the extension to the clients’ property was to extend so that it was level with next doors property
Penalty: No order

---

Date: 17 October 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: knowingly took copies of former employees files to which he wasn’t entitled, and in doing so failed to act with honesty and integrity
Penalty: 3 month suspension

---

Date: 17 October 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: knowingly allowed unauthorised copies of Gelder & Kitchen LLP files to be stored on the premises of Harris Associates Ltd and to be accessed by staff, and failed to put processes in place to prevent them being used in a planning application; and in doing so, he failed to act with integrity
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 26 February 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to set out terms of engagement in writing; charged VAT to her client when she was not VAT registered; undertook work as an architect without having in place adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance; and declared to the ARB that she held professional indemnity insurance when she did not.
Penalty: £500 penalty order

---

Date: 25 – 27 July 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to provide adequate terms of engagement; failed to adequately keep the complainant informed as to progress despite being instructed to carry out additional supervision of the project.
Penalty: £1250 penalty order

---

Date: 21 July 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide adequate terms of engagement; failed to adhere to the terms agreed at the outset, failed to carry out work without delay; failed to communicate adequately with the complainant; withheld drawings until the Complainant had agreed to new terms and conditions, and issued inaccurate and/or unjustified invoices.
Penalty: £2000 penalty order (by consent)

---

Date: 6 July 2016
Nature of offence: Criminal Conviction.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 14 – 16 March and 26 and 30 August 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Overvalued the works, provided an explanation concerning the removal of a downstand beam which was unsatisfactory, inaccurate and misleading.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 23 – 25 May 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide terms of engagement before undertaking professional work.
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 11 – 14 April and 17 May 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to control the cost of the project to redevelop a Health Centre.
Penalty: £2000 penalty order

---

Date: 9 – 11 May 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to provide adequate terms of engagement; failed to disclose a conflict of interest.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 4 May 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: Failed to issue adequate terms of engagement; failed to respond appropriately to a client complaint.
Penalty: No order

---

Date: 12 – 14 January, 7 March (in chambers), 27 April 2016
Nature of offence: UPC & SPI: Failed to carry out work faithfully, conscientiously and with skill and care; failed adequately or at all to provide the client with relevant information and advice, failed adequately or at all to deal with a complaint or dispute about professional work.
Penalty: 6 month suspension

---

Date: 5 April 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: the architect made statements which brought himself and the profession into disrepute, contrary to Standard 9.2 of the Code
Penalty: No order

---

Date: 24 March 2016
Nature of Offence: UPC- failed adequately, or at all, to ensure that the business style of the practice in which he was the sole registered architect was not misleading; failed adequately, or at all, to ensure that the architectural work carried out by the practice on behalf of the Complainant was under the control and management of a registered architect; failed adequately, or at all, to ensure that the Complainant was aware of the identity of the registered architect at the practice; and failed adequately, or at all, to ensure that the Complainant was aware that other persons carrying out architectural work on the project were not registered architects.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7 March 2016
Nature of Offence: Criminal Conviction
Penalty: £1500 penalty order

---

Date: 1 – 2 March 2016
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to enter into a written agreement with his client prior to undertaking any professional work; failed to carry out work without undue delay
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 10 & 11 September, 27 October 2015 and 1 February 2016
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to keep client informed of the cost of the works as contained in the contract and miselad the complainant as to the costs position; provided misleading advice to the complainant.
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 12 & 13 May, 17 August and 21 January 2016
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to provide the client with adequate terms of engagement; claimed retrospective fees without prior approval from the client
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 & 27 February 2015 and  2 March 2015 and 15 January 2016
Nature of Offence: UPC: acted without integrity and/or in a manner inconsistent with his professional obligations in failing to advise his clients of the consequences of entering into a fixed payment schedule and failed to act with integrity and/or faithfully and conscientiously and with due regard to relevant technical and professional standards in the administration of a contract.
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 24 & 25 September and 7 & 8 December 2015
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to ensure that works were completed in accordance with the contract drawings, and agreed deviations from the contract without the client’s prior approval; failed to ensure the building works were carried out to a satisfactory standard.
Penalty: 6 month suspension

---

Date: 2 December 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to prepare accurate drawings; failed to visit site prior to submitting a planning application; failed to deal with a dispute appropriately and sought to blame the complainant for own failings & SPI: failed to prepare accurate drawings
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 16 November 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to provide terms of engagement; failed to keep client updated of costs
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 October 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to set out terms of engagement, failed to deal with a complaint adequately
Penalty: Reprimand by consent

---

Date: 14 August 2015
Nature of offence: UPC/SPI: failed to keep clients informed of any issue which may significantly affect the quality and/or cost of the proposed project, and/or specifically failed to notify the clients that the figures quoted were not an estimate for the full build costs of the project and would only cover the cost of the square metre increase.

---

Date: 11 – 13 August 2015
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to adequately set out written terms of engagement, failed to properly communicate with clients, failed to promptly inform the complainants that the building contractor had withdrawn from the project, failed to provide estimates for the cost of the build in line with the the complainants budget, failed to adequately progress the building warrant, failed to provide the complainants with planning permission documents promptly, failed to deal with invoices without undue delay, redacted the date of a delayed invoice , failed to develop an action plan and estimated timetable for the work although it had been requested, failed to ensure that the already delayed building work started in 2012, failed to deal with a complaint appropriately.
Penalty: 12 month suspension

---

Date: 23 and 24 June and 10 July 2015
Nature of offence: UPC: made representations which he knew, or ought to have known, to be inaccurate, misleading and unfair to others, and in so doing he failed to act with integrity and avoid any actions or situations inconsistent with his professional obligations; He failed to take any, or adequate, steps to ensure that the representations made in a letter were accurate in all, or any, respects;  disclosed confidential information without the prior consent of his client’s personal representatives, and in so doing failed to maintain client confidentiality
Penalty: £1250 penalty order

---

Date: 9,10 & 17 June 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: Facilitated, permitted or acquiesced in the issue of a final Architects certificate without fully inspecting and/or approving the works and/or when he knew there were outstanding matters; made representations which were inaccurate misleading and untrue, failed to respond adequately or at all to a complaint about his professional work
Penalty: £1500 penalty order

---

Date: 5 June 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to carry out work faithfully and conscientiously, failed to provide an effective and efficient service to his client, failed to deal with his client’s complaint
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 2 June 2015
Nature of Offence: Criminal Conviction
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 21 May 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: received a police caution in respect of a common assault
Penalty: £500 penalty order

---

Date:18 May 2015
Nature of Offence: Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to maintain adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 20 – 24 April, 29 April (chambers) and 16 June 2015 (tel conf)
Nature of offence: UPC: specifed a heating system that was unsuitable and inadequate for the property; failed to adequately specify and design the heating system; failed to adequately specify the slate flooring; failed to ensure the protection of flooring during ongoing works; certified defective work in respect of the flooring; failed adequately to explain and discuss or obtain permission for all variations to the contract; failed to ensure cost savings were applied to the contract in a reasonable time
Penalty: £1500 penalty order

---

Date: 15-16 April and 19 June 2015
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to adequately or at all set out terms of engagement in writing; failed to recognise and/or declare a conflict of interest when he advised he complainants that he could provide all of the building services alongside his architectural services; failed to provide monthly updates on costs as agreed; failed to provide full reconciliation and projection in relation to costs in or around December 2012, failed to provide any such budget review/costs comparison; failed to monitor costs and/or report on overspending and as a result, allowed costs to excessivly exceed the estimate; failed to respond to the complainant’s complaint in a timely manner; failed to cooperate with the ARB’s investigations
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 6 March 2015
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to perform appropriate and accurate duties for the obtaining of planning permission for a property renovation; failed to respond promptly and/or appropriately to a complaint and/or dispute about professional work
Penalty: £2000 penalty order

---

Date: 8 September 2014 & 29 January 2015
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to act impartially in administering Joint Contract Tribunals (JCT) contract in his role as client, architect and contract administrator. £1000 penalty order
Penalty: Superseded to Erasure following non-payment of the penalty order

---

Date: 1-2 December 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failed to issue adequate terms of engagement
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 27 October 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to have adequate insurance and failed to deal with a complaint
Penalty: £1500 penalty order

---

Date: 10 September & 20 October 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failed to adequately set out terms of engagement; failed to carry out work faithfully and conscientiously; failed to adequately deal with a complaint
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 17 September 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failed to issue adequate terms of engagement; failed to maintain adequate insurance
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 15 September 2014
Nature of offence: Criminal Conviction for eight offences of making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of a child.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 16 and 17 June 2014
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to perform his professional work with due skill, care and diligence.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 14 and 15 May 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to enter into a written agreement with the client
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 9 May 2014
Nature of offence: Criminal Conviction: Conspiracy to cheat the Public Revenue.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 27 March and 8 May 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to carry out his professional work faithfully and conscientiously
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7 – 11 April 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI :failed to adequately set out terms of contract in writing, failed to carry out work with due skill, care and diligence, failed to keep his client informed of the progress of works, failed to carry out work without undue delay, acted inconsistently with professional obligations in requesting a payment from a third party supplier
Penalty: One year suspension

---

Date: 29 January and 4 April 2014
Nature of offence: UPC: acted dishonestly in making statements to his client which he knew, or ought ot have know, were misleading and/or discreditable to the profession, Failed to carry out work faithfully and conscientiously, failed to deal with complaints or disputes appropriately, failed to cooperate with the Board.
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 24 March 2014
Nature of offence: UPC: failed to provide written terms of engagement; failed to carry out his work faithfully and conscientiously and with due regard to relevant technical and professional standards; failed to preserve the security of up to £10,000 entrusted to him in the course of his practice; failed to mainatin the reputation of architects and acted with a wilful disregard of his responsibilities and a lack of integrity in failing to inform the Board within 28 days that he had been made the subject of a bankruptcy order and that he had failed to pay a judgment debt.
Penalty: Two year suspension

---

Date: 21 March 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to ensure that professional finances were managed prudently
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 24 February 2014
Nature of offence: UPC:failed to deal with a complaint from a third party appropriately; failed to co-operate with the ARB; failed to provide evidence of PII; failed to notify the ARB of a bankruptcy order.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 5 February 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to carry out work without undue delay and failure to keep client informed
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 22 January 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to maintain adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance and run-off cover
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 7 – 8 January 2014
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI: Failed adequately, or at all, prepare an appropriate contract between his client and the contractor.
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 18 – 19 December 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI: Failed to carry out work without undue delay, failed to inform client about the absence of a stage two building warrant
Penalty: £2000 penalty order

---

Date: 9 December 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to provide terms of engagement at the outset of appointment
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 28 – 29 November 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to ensure that an employee was adequately supervised
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 5 – 6 November 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to provide compliant terms of engagement at the outset of appointment
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 21 October 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to ensure that the business style of the practice, to include the letterhead, was not misleading; failure to co-operate with ARB’s investigations
Penalty: No Order

---

Date: 14 – 16 August 2013 & 15 October 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to adequately set out terms of engagement; failed to carry out work with due skill, care and diligence; failed to carry out work without undue delay; failed to keep his client informed; failed to adequately deal with a client complaint; made unjustified claims for costs and VAT; failed to provide evidence of adequate insurance.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 17 – 18 October 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to promote professional services in a responsible manner; failure to set out adequate terms of engagement
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 9 October 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Misleading promotion of business; failed to ensure that a client of the practice was informed that the project was under the architect’s control and management
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 19 September 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failed to issue adequate terms of engagement; failed maintain adequate insurance
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 15-18 April 2013 & 3 September 2013
Nature of offence: UPC – made a claim for costs which he knew, or ought to have known he could not justify and made representations in witness statements provided for arbitration proceedings which were inaccurate, misleading and untrue.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 27 – 28 August 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC: Complaint 1: Failed to respond to requests for information, failed to co-operate fully and promptly with ARB, failed to provide evidence of insurance. Complaint 2: Failed to issue adequate terms of engagement, failed to deal with a complaint about professional work promptly and appropriately, failed to co-operate fully and promptly with ARB, used inaccurate and misleading information in relation to the promotion of business, failed to keep the client informed of the progress of work
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 3 July 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC and SPI – Failure to provide terms of engagement, failed to prepare designs in line with initial brief, made errors relating to the footprint of the house and measurements to the roof
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 24 – 25 June 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC – Failure to adequately set out terms of engagement
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 4 – 5 June 2013
Nature of offence: UPC: Acted in a manner inconsistent with his professional obligations in respect of the appointment of builders; offered a service that combined consulting and architectural services without explaining that no independent architectural function could therefore be provided; failed to provide adequate compentence and resources for the project, failed to provide sufficient terms of engagement, failed to carry out work without undue delay and within agreed cost limits, made misrepresentations to the Board.
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 14 May 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC – made a statement in an email which was contrary to his obligations to maintain the reputation of the architects’ profession
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 1 May 2013
Nature of Offence: SPI & UPC: failed to carry out his work conscientiously and with skill and care, in that he failed to adequately, or at all, survey the existing site conditions which resulted in the extension not fitting properly at all; failed to carry out his work conscientiously and with skill and care, in that he failed to apply for planning permission; failed to deal with a complaint concerning his professional work appropriately
Penalty: £3000 penalty order

---

Date: 30 April 2013
Nature of offence: UPC – failed to disclose to his client in writing his relationship with the builder on the project ; certified the value of works contrary to the best interests of the client; refused to provide the client with a copy of minutes from a meeting unless he was paid monies; wrote a letter to the client’s employer which was inappropriate and contained unfounded allegations.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 29 April 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC – failed to adequately set out terms of engagement in writing; failed to record in writing variations to the original agreement; failed to carry out work within agreed cost limits and failed to keep complainants informed of progress of works and failed to safeguard the complainants’ money
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 27 March 2013
Nature of Offence: Criminal Conviction – breach of HSE regulations
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 6 -7 March 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC – fafiled to inspect the works appropriately, and incorrectly advised the client that the issuing of a Certificate of Practical Completion would not affect their right, failed to advise the client property over liquidated damagers and granted a five month extension of time when it was not approriate to do so
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 12 February 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC – undertook work in a personal capacity for a client of his Practice at a time when the Pracitce was in financial difficulties, failed to hold appropriate professional indemnity insurance for this work, faield to notify the Registrar of a failure to pay a judgment debt relating to an employment tribunal, and that he had been made the subject of a bankruptcy order
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 17 December 2012 and 30 Janaury 2013
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to co-operate fully and promptly with the Board
Penalty: £500 penalty order

---

Date: 7 December 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to provide adequate terms of engagement
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 6 December 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to act without delay and failure to keep client adequately informed
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 28-29 November 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to adequately deal with complaint

---

Date: 26 September 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to ensure that his personal and professional finances were managed prudently and responsibly.
Penalty: 1 year suspension

---

Date: 25 September 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to inform employer and used position with employer to prepare and submit a tender on behalf of architect’s own practice; failure to act with integrity
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 18 & 19 June 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC: failed to ensure that his professional finances were managed prudently; failed to pay a judgement debt; failed to deal with a complaint promptly or appropriately; failed to report to his clients in writing the risk posed to their proposed extension; failed to request tenders from three of four contractors; failed to have appropriate insurance arrangements; and failed to respond to correspondence from the Board.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 12 June 2012
Nature of Offence: SPI – failure to obtain building regulation approval
Penalty: No order

---

Date: 11 June 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – Using unlicensed software in practice
Penalty: £2000 penalty order

---

Date: 22 May 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failed to ensure business was managed competently; continued to use the name of a liquidated company; pursued fees due to a liquidated company; made unprofessional representations, and failed to deal with a complaint appropriately.
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 3 May 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to manage business(es) competently resultingin company liquidation, failed to inform Registrar of liquidation within 28 days or at all, failure to correspond with the Board in a timely fashion
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 27 March 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to disclose a conflict of interest, failure to provide adequate terms of engagement and disclosed confidential information
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 20 March 2012
Nature of Offence: Failure to pay PCC penalty order
Penalty: One year suspension

---

Date: 20 & 21 March 2012
Nature of Offence: SPI – failure to carry out work faithfully, conscientiously and with due skill, care and diligence
£500 penalty order

---

Date: 12 & 13 March 2012
Nature of Offence: UPC- failure to deal with a complaint appropriately; failed to adequately set out terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 11 January 2012
Nature of Offence: Failed to pay PCC penalty order
Penalty: 6 month suspension

---

Date: 21 – 23 November 2011
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to act in client’s best interest and consistent with professsional obligation, failure to act with integrity, failure to carry out professional work faithfully and conscietiously, failre to carry out work without undue delay, failure to deal with a complaint about professional work
Penalty: £1500 penalty order

---

Date: 11 October 2011
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to ensure the practice was under her control and management; failure to deal with a complaint promplty; failure to respond to the ARB
Penalty: £500 penalty order

---

Date: 15 August 2011
SPI – failure to carry out work with due skill, care and diligence
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to have in place effective internal procedures to include monitoring and review procedures; failure to exercise adequate supervision of staff; failure to co-operate fully and promptly with the ARB
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 7 June 2011
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to act with integrity and made a statement which he knew to be unfair to others or discreditable to the profession and failure to ensure a client’s confidential information was safeguarded.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12 January 2011
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to respond to the Architects Registration Board in accordance with the timescale set out in the Code
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 19 April 2011
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to record provision for termination and dispute resolution and that he was subject to the disciplinary functions of the ARB; failure to ensure the practice had effective internal monitoring and review procedures in place; failure to keep clients informed of costs; and failure to handle the client’s or their legal representative’s complaint appropriately.
Penalty: Four-month suspension

---

Date: 21 October 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC –failure to ensure the work of the practice was under the control and management of an architect, failure to ensure that the identity of that architect was apparent to clients and failure to inform clients of the disciplinary sanction of the Board.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 1 September 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC- failure to report a serious breach of the Code to the ARB.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 1 September 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI – dishonesty; failure to carry out work faithfully and conscientiously; failure to undertake work without undue delay; failure to provide terms of engagement; failure to deal with a dispute appropriately.
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 25 August 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to make it clear that his services would not incorporate the independent functions of an architect.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 17 August 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to provide evidence of insurance in the form required by the Board; and failure to respond to correspondence from the Board.
Penalty: No order

---

Date: 12 July 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to record terms of contract in writing; failure to carry out work without undue delay; failure to deal with complaints about his professional work; failure to deal with correspondence from the Board.
Penalty: £2500 penalty order

---

Date: 12 May 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to maintain adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance work carried out in a private capacity
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 13 April 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to maintain adequate and appropriate insurance and failed to respond to the Board
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 19 March 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to adequately set out Terms of Engagement in writing
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 3 & 4 March 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to disclose a potential conflict in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 15 December 2009 and 1 March 2010
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to provide adequate terms of contract
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 January 2010 SPI – failure to perform work with due skill care and diligence
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to adequately set out terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 8 December 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC– failure to maintain adequate and apppropriate professional indemnity insurance run-off cover
Penalty: £1000 fine

---

Date: 29 & 30 October 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to issue correct Terms of Engagement in Writing
Penalty: £750 penalty order

---

Date: 25 June 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC- failure to set out Terms of Engagement in Writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 27 May 20109
Nature of Offence: UPC
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 27 May 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 27 May 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 7 April 2009
Nature of Offence: Criminal conviction
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 25 February 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to manage finances prudently; failure to maintain aequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 24 February 2009
Nature of Offence: Criminal conviction
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12 January 2009
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to provide evidence of Professional Indemnity Insurance; failure to respond to correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 2 May & 28 October 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – failure to provide evidence of Professional Indemnity Insurance; failure to respond to correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 18 June 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – Failure to pay a PCC Penalty Order, failing to carry out professional work; failing to provide evidence of PII; failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 18 June 2008
Nature of Offence: Criminal Conviction
Penalty: No order

---

Date: 18 June 2008
Criminal Conviction
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 17 June 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – failing to provide evidence of PII and failing to deal with corresopndence from the Board
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 17 June 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC –failing to provide evidence of PII and failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 02 May 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – failing to hold professional indemnity insurance and failing to respond to correspondence from the Board Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 02 May 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – failing to deal with a client complaint and failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 February 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – holding himself out as an architect when not entitled and providing misleading information
Penalty: Six month suspension

---

Date: 17 January 2008
Nature of Offence: UPC – Failure to manage work professionally and with regard to the interests of client
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 11 December 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC – Misuse of the affix RIBA; making misleading representations to client; failing to preserve the security of clients funds and failing to ensure personal and professional finances were managed prudently
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 26 November 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC – Failing to provide adequate terms of engagement, failing to charge client as promised, lack of PII cover and using the title ‘architect’ when not on the Register
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 25 June 2007
Nature of Offence: SPI – failing to perform his work with due skill, care and diligence, and certifying work for a contractor when he should not have done so.
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12 June 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC – failing to have professional indemnity insurance in place, failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 12 June 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC – failing to provide evidence of compliance with the insurance requirement and failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 6 June 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC – carrying out work with no professional indemnity insurance, failing to ensure run-off cover after allowing her PII cover to lapse, and convicted of breaching sections 7 and 9 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990p
Penalty: One year suspension

---

Date: 13 March 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC: failing to deal with correspondence from both client and the Board
Penalty: £1500 penalty order

---

Date: 28 February 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC: failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: £1000 penalty order

---

Date: 21 February 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC: failing to hold appropriate professional indemnity insurance
Penalty: £750 penalty order

---

Date: 24 January 2007
Nature of Offence: UPC: failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 18 October 2006
Nature of Offence: UPC: failing to provide evidence of professional indemnity insurance and failing to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: 1 year suspension

---

Date: 28 September 2006
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide a written contract to clients, failure to supervise staff and acting in a conflict of interest situation
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 21 July 2006
Nature of Offence: Criminal conviction relating to his practice as an architect
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 19 January 2006
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to produce evidence of professional indemnity insurance
Penalty: £1,000 penalty order

---

Date: 19 January 2006
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to deal with correspondence from the Board
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 24 November 2005
Nature of Offence: Criminal conviction relating to practise as an architect
Penalty: No penalty

---

Date: 05 October 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 12 July 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to pay a judgment debt
Penalty: Reprimand & £500 penalty order

---

Date: 28 June 2005
Nature of Offence: SPI: failure to administer contract correctly
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 14 June 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: failing to deal with complaints from a client properly, holding herself out as an architect when unregistered
Penalty: £600 penalty order

---

Date: 07 April 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 07 April 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 07 April 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 07 April 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 15 March 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: £1,000 penalty order

---

Date: 15 March 2005
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: £1,250 penalty order

---

Date: 03 March 2005
Nature of Offence: Criminal Conviction
Penalty: 18 month suspension

---

Date: 24 August 2004
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: No Penalty

---

Date: 13 July 2004
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing and causing undue delays
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 09 December 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 16 October 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to manage finances and deal with complaints
Penalty: 9 month suspensions

---

Date: 01 October 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC: Not agreeing terms of contract in writing
Penalty: £1,500 penalty order

---

Date: 14 July 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC: not having adequate insurance
Penalty: £1,000 penalty order

---

Date: 11 March 2003
Nature of Offence: SPI: falling below acceptable standards for an architect
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 04 March 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI: lack of due care, skill & diligence
Penalty: £2,000 penalty order

---

Date: 04 February 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without insurance
Penalty: £1,000 penalty & 1 year suspension

---

Date: 15 January 2003
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI: Misleading clients, practising without insurance & failure to deal with complaints
Penalty: Erasure

---

Date: 29 October 2002
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI: Inaccurate drawings, failure to submit plans, to supervise staff and provide a written contract
Penalty: 9 month suspension

---

Date: 11 Septemer 2002
Nature of Offence: UPC: Mishandling of client monies and failure to deal with complaints
Penalty: Reprimand & £500 penalty

---

Date: 16 May 2002
Nature of Offence: UPC & DC: misleading planning authority & misappropriation of funds
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 27 February 2002
Nature of Offence: UPC & SPI: Failure to administer contract
Penalty: 6 month suspension

---

Date: 26 Septemer 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 02 May 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: Misleading a client in a planning application
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 02 May 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to manage business properly, undue delay and dealing with complaints inappropriately
Penalty: 2 year suspension

---

Date: 02 May 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: £250 penalty

---

Date: 02 May 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: No penalty order

---

Date: 24 January 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: inappropriate termination of agreement
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 04 January 2001
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 06 Septemer 2000
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failing to hand over documents
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 27 July 2000
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to provide terms of engagement in writing and failure to deal with planning application
Penalty:£800 penalty followed by Erasure for non-payment

---

Date: 14 March 2000
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to account for client monies
Penalty:£500 penalty

---

Date: 16 February 2000
Nature of Offence: UPC: Flawed tendering process
Penalty:2 year suspension

---

Date: 08 December 1999
Nature of Offence: UPC: Practising without professional indemnity insurance in place
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 16 November 1999
Nature of Offence: UPC: Failure to pay a judgment debt
Penalty:4 month suspension

---

Date: 20 May 1999
Nature of Offence: UPC: failure to deal with clients money properly
Penalty: Reprimand

---

Date: 20 April 1999
Nature of Offence: Criminal convictions for forgery and fraud
Penalty:Erasure

---

Date: 19 December 1997
Nature of Offence: UPC: Contractual, tendering and inspection errors
Penalty:Erasure