Table of prosecutions
ARB follows the guidelines set out in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act for publicising prosecutions for misuse of the title “architect”. Only people who are registered with ARB can legally call themselves an architect, and the Architects Act gives ARB the power to prosecute those who use the title when they have no right. This is explained in more detail in our information sheet on Section 20 of the Architects Act.
We do not publicise the names of people who were fined by the magistrates any more than five years beyond the date of their conviction. For those who received a conditional discharge, or who were bound over, the publicity for their cases will cease one year from the date of their conviction.
The tables below set out the details of prosecutions which the Board has brought against unregistered individuals using the title “architect”.
Table 1 lists all the “live” convictions, while Table 2 contains those that are “spent”. This second table simply gives details of the magistrates’ court where the case was heard, what penalty was imposed, what costs were awarded and a summary of the charge.
| Date | Name | Magistrates’ Court | Penalty imposed (£) | Costs awarded (£) | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28/02/12 | Mr Nichol Rosalie t/a UPS Architects | Bolton | £5000 | £1433 | Mr Rosalie continued to trade as UPS Architects’ on websites, planning applications, and advertisements. |
| 07/02/11 | SDE Architecture Ltd | Leeds | £600 | £1400 | The company misrepresented that its sole director was an “architect” despite previous warnings. |
| 02/09/10 | Mr Thomas Bedford (MAB Architects) | South Western | £150 | £850 | Mr Bedford continued to use the trading style of ‘T P Bedford RIBA, MAB Architects’ on both his stationery and architectural drawings. |
| 16/08/10 | Kevin Birch Architectural Services | Wood Green | Mr Birch appealed against the earlier decision against him (by Enfield magistrates on 11 February 2010) but after considering the evidence, the Wood Green magistrates upheld the original finding and ordered Mr Birch to pay costs totalling £3,113 in addition to the original fine of £1,250 | ||
| 11/02/10 | Kevin Birch Architectural Services | Enfield | £1250 | £1500 | The individual had continued to advertise on a website with "architect" within its domain name and content |
| 07/12/09 | John Kirkpatrick | Downpatrick, Northern Ireland | £600 | £1000 | The individual had continued to hold himself out as an architect prior being reinstated to the Register, having previously been convicted of a similar offence. |
| 05/11/09 | Tarek Nahas (Anqa Architects) | Ealing | £750 | £1200 | The company continued to advertise under the heading of “architects” in directories and submitted architectural drawings using the title. |
| 15/07/09 | Mr Colin Blanchard | Stratford | £1000 | £5,954 | Mr Blanchard used the suffix 'RIBA' on planning applications; he is not a member of the Royal Institute of British Architects and had been erased from the Register of Architects in 1996. |
| 13/05/09 | David Grant (Inspire Design) | Stratford | £1500 | £4500 | The company continued to advertise under the "Architects" classification in a paper directory and use the title on its own website despite several warnings. |
| 1/4/09 | Masood Akhtar Associates & MHA Consultants (UK) Ltd | Birmingham | £2400 | £1437 | Both companies, owned by Mr Akhtar, had taken adverts out under the ‘Architects’ section of directories |
| 12/2/09 | Acorn Building Design | Mansfield | £5500 | £1855 | Firm continued to use title architect in advertisements and on website despite several warnings |
| 26/1/09 | John Simms | Banbury | £2250 | £3000 | Individual had previously been erased by the Professional Conduct Committee, but had continued to use the title ‘architect’. |
| 1/12/2008 | John Kirkpatrick | Downpatrick, Northern Ireland | £400 | £500 | Mr Kirkpatrick has not been registered since March 1999 but had continued to use the title "architect" on his business stationary and advertisements |
| 8/9/08 | Christopher Cowley | Dartford | £2250 | £5000 | Defendant had called himself an architect in his company returns; submitted architectural drawings using the title; and confirmed to a third party that he was an architect. |
| 4/7/08 | Integrated Designs (Midlands) Ltd | Birmingham | 800 | 1,262.13 | The firm had previously agreed to refrain from calling themselves ‘architects’, yet was discovered to be using the title on the sign above their shop. |
| 28/11/07 | Mohammed Farooq Hussain | Bradford | 2000 | 1,629.19 | Mr Hussain had held himself out as an architect and made a statement to that effect during legal proceedings |
| 7/11/07 | Alfred Jaramillo | Westminster | 1000 | 1,200 | Mr Jaramillo mislead members of the public into thinking he was a registered architect and member of the RIBA |
| Date | Magistrates’ Court | Penalty imposed (£) | Costs awarded (£) | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20/3/07 | Staines | 1000 | 3074.55 | The individual had not been registered since 1997, but had continued to trade as “The Architects Co” |
| 2/11/06 | Brighton | 500 | 1356.23 | The individual had submitted planning applications in 2005, referring to himself as an architect, despite not having been registered since 1991. |
| 1/11/06 | Aberdare | 1500 | 1250 | Despite being informed that it was unlawful to use the title “architect” while not registered with ARB, the individual continued to describe himself thus. |
| 6/9/06 | Stratford | 200 | 1300 | The individual had falsely advertised his firm under an “Architects” listing in the Estates Gazette. |
| 7/8/06 | Devizes | 750 | 1576.11 | The individual pleaded guilty to the charges which related to him describing his company as “architects” at Companies House. |
| 12/6/06 | Lewes | 1600 | 1090.13 | The individual appeared on behalf of the firm. He had used the title “architect” on the firm’s website, but there was no registered architect practising there. |
| 10/5/06 | Worcester | 1500 | 1000 | The firm wrongly advertised themselves as architects, using the RIBA logo on their signage and misled consumers into believing they were dealing with properly trained and fully qualified registered architects. |
| 2/3/06 | West London | 750 | 949.84 | The individual had submitted drawings and a planning application and had described himself as an “architect” on all the documents. He is not, and never has been registered with ARB. |
| 22/2/06 | Stratford | 4500 | 1230 | The firm and an associate partner of the firm were illegally using the title “architect” in their signage and business. |
| 5/1/06 | High Peak | 300 | 700 | The individual had knowingly been breaching the Act for some 18 months, not having been registered since 1993. |
| 22/12/05 | West London | 1000 | 1000 | The individual had knowingly been breaching the Act as he had not been registered since March 2004. |
| 6/9/06 | Stratford | 200 | 1300 | The individual had falsely advertised his firm under an “Architects” listing in the Estates Gazette. |
| 7/8/06 | Devizes | 750 | 1576.11 | The individual pleaded guilty to the charges which related to him describing his company as “architects” at Companies House. |
| 12/6/06 | Lewes | 1600 | 1090.13 | An individual appeared on behalf of the firm. He had used the title “architect” on the firm’s website, but there was no registered architect practising there. |
| 10/5/06 | Worcester | 1500 | 1000 | The firm wrongly advertised themselves as architects, using the RIBA logo on their signage and misled consumers into believing they were dealing with properly trained and fully qualified registered architects. |
| 2/3/06 | West London | 750 | 949.84 | The individual had submitted drawings and a planning application and had described himself as an “architect” on all the documents. He is not, and never has been registered with ARB. |
| 22/2/06 | Stratford | 4500 | 1230 | The firm and the individual, an associate partner of the firm, were illegally using the title “architect” in their signage and business. |
| 5/1/06 | High Peak | 300 | 700 | The individual had knowingly been breaching the Act for some 18 months, not having been registered since 1993. |
| 22/12/05 | West London | 1000 | 1000 | The individual had knowingly been breaching the Act as he had not been registered since March 2004. |
| 13/10/05 | Staines | 1000 | 1500 | Although he had signed an undertaking to the ARB in September 2004 not to use the title “architect” in the course of his business, he continued to do so. |
| 18/2/05 | Welshpool | 750 each | 1850 | Despite being warned by ARB, they continued to breach the Act in their advertisements |
| 12/1/05 | North Surrey | 300 | 700 | The matter had been referred to ARB by a registered architect. Mr Pearce continued to use the title despite not having been registered since March 2004. |
| 4/1/05 | Loughborough | 500 | 480 | The individual had not been registered since March 2003 but had continued to use the title “architect”. |
| 24/5/04 | South East Essex | 3000 | 1002.27 | The case had been referred to ARB by the South Essex Chapter of the RIBA. The architects had been drawn to their attention following an advert in the local paper, in which they described themselves as “Council approved architects”. |
| 27/1/04 | Bath | 1000 | 844.53 | The architect was unlawfully describing himself as a “Leisure Architect”. The case was brought to ARB’s attention by an architect in Devon, after he had received a mailshot. |
| 4/5/07 | West London | Conditional Discharge | 250 | The court took into account the individual's circumstance when imposing the penalty |
| 7/6/06 | Camberwell Green | Conditional discharge | 500 | The individual had not been registered since 2002 but continued to use the affix “RIBA” |
| 18/5/06 | West London | Conditional discharge | 1488.34 | The Board had received complaints about the individual, who was practising without being registered.91. |
| 14/4/04 | Central Buckinghamshire | 200 | 293.75 | The case had been referred to ARB by Hertfordshire Trading Standards. The individual had not been registered since 1999. |
| 18/3/04 | Bedford | Conditional discharge | 200 | The matter had been brought to ARB’s attention by a solicitor acting for the individual’s client, a property company. |
| 1/7/02 | Enfield | 1250 | 2000 | The case had been referred to ARB by the achitect's client as she was dissatisfied with the quality of service provided. |
| 21/3/02 | Brighton | 2000 | 795.09 | The individual held himself out as an architect but had never been registered. |
| 12/12/01 | Stoke on Trent | 750 | 1000 | |
| 7/11/01 | Cardiff | Conditional discharge | 1384.47 | |
| 9/8/01 | Greenwich | 150 | 1000 | |
| 30/3/01 | Mansfield | 900 | 1000 | |
| 25/7/00 | Maidenhead | Conditional discharge | 1500 | |
| 24/3/00 | Wakefield | 150 | 250 | |
| 5/3/99 | Evesham | 1500 | 750 | |
| 8/11/98 | Highbury | 1000 | 850 | |
| 1/10/98 | Thame | 2000 | 750 | |
| 9/9/98 | Hertfordshire | 1750 | 220 | |
| 12/6/98 | Yorkshire | Conditional discharge | 0 | |
| 22/4/98 | Cheshunt | 500 | 750 | |
| 5/2/98 | Oxford | 750 | 500 |

Print this page