ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD

THE PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE

ON

28 FEBRUARY 2007

Present:

Chairman:    Peter Verdin
PCC Member:     Stephen Brookhouse
PCC Member:    Linda Read

- - - - - -

IN THE MATTER OF
PATRICIA PATEL (REG NO. 054979G)

- - - - - -

MR STEPHEN BATTERSBY appeared on behalf of the COMMITTEE
MR JOHN WILLIAMS appeared on behalf of the BOARD

MR D MAY attended on behalf of POLLARD THOMAS EDWARDS ARCHITECTS
MR SIMON HOWARD attended on behalf of ARB

- - - - - - -

(Transcribed by Harry Counsell & Co
Cliffords Inn, Fetter Lane, London EC4A 1LD
Telephone 020 7269 0370
Fascimile: 020 7831 2526

- - -  - -

DECISION

MR VERDIN:  Well we find that in these circumstances the failure to reply to correspondence from the ARB and the failure to return the initial form in respect of insurance is unacceptable professional conduct, and we regard this matter very seriously. 
      We have been impressed by what Mr May said, but Mrs Patel’s failure is serious.  She failed to return a simple form, which required a box ticking.  She was then sent several reminders after her initial failure.  She then telephoned the office, which is the only time that there had been any communication from Mrs Patel to the office, when she made a promise to reply, but she failed to do so.
      Mrs Patel then failed to appear at the hearing, where it would have been open to us in her absence, and in the absence of any evidence from her, to draw an inference from that absence and lack of response that she was uninsured.  And if we had drawn that inference we would have certainly considered erasure from the register.  But that committee, which was slightly differently constituted to this, decided that they would not draw that inference but would wait and give Mrs Patel yet another chance to attend, and that we could hear what she had to say.  That has resulted in a charge of being uninsured being dismissed, and we now dismiss that charge. 
      I want to stress that Mrs Patel’s failure to attend the hearing last time is not part of the offence of unacceptable professional conduct as it has been brought, we refer merely to the particulars, 1B and 1C in the report from the complainant’s solicitor, but it is certainly symptomatic of Mrs Patel’s approach to this matter.
      Her neglect has caused the Board considerable expense and inconvenience.  But I want to stress that the expense is an expense on the profession.  We have heard what Mrs Patel has said in mitigation, but we cannot fail to regard this as a serious professional failure, and in the circumstances you will be fined £1,000. 
      The Clerk may wish to say something.
THE CLERK:  Yes, normally the time allowed for payment is 28 days. Mrs Patel, would that be able to be discharged within 28 days?
MRS PATEL:  Can I have a little bit longer?  Well no, okay, fine, yes, I’ll sort it out.
MR CLERK:  Okay.
MR VERDIN:  Thank you.  Thank you very much, and thank you, Mr May, for coming along, you have been a great help to us.