Skip main navigation and go to content

Professional Conduct Committee Decisions

ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE

IN THE MATTER OF

Derrick Arthur Matthews (024436H)

On

25 February 2009

Cliffords Inn Conference Centre
Fetter Lane
London EC4A 1LD

Present:

Chair: Mr Peter Verdin
PCC Member: Mrs Barbara Saunders
PCC Member: Mr Donal Hutchinson

Ms Nicola Hill appeared as Clerk to the Committee
Mr Peter Cadman appeared on behalf of the Board
Mr Matthews did not attend the Hearing and was not represented

­­­­­­­

CHARGE

 The charge is that the architect is guilty of unacceptable professional conduct, individually or cumulatively, in relation to the following facts:

  1. That the Architect failed to ensure that his personal and professional finances were managed prudently contrary to Standard 8 of the Code  of Conduct
  2. That in an application for re-admission to the Register the Architect provided information that was misleading
  3. That the Architect did not have any or any adequate professional indemnity insurance cover or
  4. That the Architect failed to produce to the Architects Registration Board upon reasonable request evidence of any adequate professional indemnity insurance

DECISION

THE CHAIRMAN:  This is the case of Mr. Derrick Arthur Matthews.  The Board today was represented by Peter Cadman.  Mr. Matthews did not attend.  He had telephoned the office yesterday and said that he was not proposing to attend.  It was on that occasion drawn to his attention that the Committee could go ahead with the hearing in his absence and that if the Committee did make a finding of guilt they did have the power to erase his name from register as well as to inflict other penalties. 

The allegation against Mr. Matthews was that he had been guilty of unacceptable professional conduct.  We were told that he had failed to ensure that his personal and professional finances were managed prudently, and that is contrary to Standard 8 of the Code of Professional Conduct.  We were told that in an application for re-admission to the register he provided information that was misleading.  We were also told that he did not have any adequate professional indemnity insurance, or that he had failed to produce to the Architects Registration Board upon reasonable request evidence of any adequate professional indemnity insurance.  Those were the matters which we were told amounted either individually or collectively to unacceptable professional conduct.

Having been taken through the evidence by Mr. Cadman, we were satisfied that the architect had failed to ensure that his personal and professional finances had been managed prudently, and we were made aware that he had been made bankrupt by an order in bankruptcy dated 4th October 2007.  We were also satisfied that Mr. Matthews either did not have adequate professional indemnity insurance for periods when he should have been covered, or that he had failed to produce to the Architects Registration Board on their reasonable request evidence of that insurance. 

Based on those findings we consider that Mr. Matthews had been guilty of unacceptable professional conduct.  We have seen a story of changes of statement by Mr. Matthews, and it has been difficult perhaps sometimes to establish what he was saying, suffice it to say that he has been less than frank in his replies to the office and there has been inconsistency in what he has said to the office. 

On what we have heard we consider that he has been guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and the decision of the Committee is that his name shall be erased from the register.  That is our decision.  Thank you.

Back