By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.


Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.




Maurice McCarthy (Letters, AJ 26.04.07) again fails to follow the argument or to research matters prior to his correspondence.

If McCarthy would refer back to my original letter (AJ 01.03.07) he would see that my point was simply that ARB would have no right to tell the CABE panel member architects how to announce their registration, as long as they do not misrepresent their status. It seems that McCarthy is under the impression that if a statutory body is not expressly empowered to authorise something, it follows that it is given the lawful right to prevent it, even though it is not expressly empowered to enforce that prevention. Clearly this is nonsense.

McCarthy goes on to claim that a registered architect using the ARB affix to signify a professional qualification or membership is acting fraudulently. In trying to wriggle out of his errors, he is digging an even deeper hole for himself by implying that the CABE panel members were committing fraud - after all, what else were they doing by using the affix other than signifying that they were qualified to be registered?

Peter Arnold, Colorado, USA

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters