ARB Agrees Disciplinary Procedure Improvements

ARB Agrees Disciplinary Procedure Improvements (24/02/2001)

At its meeting in London on 22 February, the Architects Registration Board agreed a number of significant improvements to its disciplinary and investigation procedures. The changes are part of ARB's drive for continuous improvement in the way it administers its disciplinary powers for the benefit of the profession and consumers.

Professional Conduct Committee Procedures

In order to protect the rights of architects and complainants appearing before the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC), ARB will not, in future, release their details in advance of the hearing. This will ensure that the parties involved are protected from public comment prior to appropriate details being set out at the PCC. As before, though, in accordance with duties of public interest, the date, time place and cause of the hearing will be announced in the usual manner.

Following the conclusion of each PCC meeting, a transcript of the PCC's findings and judgment will be made available to interested parties. Such transcripts will include a summary of charges, the findings and any other pertinent comments which the Committee wishes to bring to the notice of the profession and the public in relation to the matters in hand.

Investigation Committee

The work of the Investigation Committee has now been extended. It will, in future, institute new procedures to deal with a range of offences not deemed serious or weighty enough to warrant an immediate referral to the PCC. Whilst such offences do not, in every circumstance, call for a full PCC hearing, there may nevertheless be shortcomings on the part of an architect. In relation to such matters, a consumer might rightly still expect ARB to take some action.

Examples of such offences could include:

* Failure to record in writing the terms and scope of the engagement

* Failure to keep a client informed of any issue that may significantly affect the cost of the work

* Failure to set up a building contract and administer it properly

* Failure to inform clients of potential conflicts of interest

* Failure to design and specify works adequately

In cases where the Investigation Committee, after a full investigation, finds evidence of such shortcomings on the part of an architect, it may warn, caution or advise the architect, and will record that it has done so. An architect unwilling to accept this would have the right to a full PCC hearing if they so wished.

Following the Board's agreement to these amendments, Robin Vaughan, Chief Executive and Registrar, commented:

"We are constantly seeking ways to improve the manner in which we deal with our statutory responsibilities. These changes will mean an improved system of discipline for those architects brought to our attention, but delivered in a way which also satisfies the consumers whom we are mandated to protect."

NB. The Investigation Committee was set up in 1999 to consider and screen complaints received, including reviewing the outcome of the work of the Investigators, before a decision is made to refer a case to the PCC.