Architect reprimanded for misconduct
A north-west London architect has been reprimanded after being found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct
Architect Marian Binkiewicz of MB2 Designs Limited (formerly MC2 Architects and Designers), Wembley, denied all charges at a hearing of the Architects Registration Board’s Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) on 21 October.
Binkiewicz was the sole registered architect at the practising company formerly known as MC2 Architects and Designers, which carried out work on a project between 2007 and 2008.
It was alleged that despite accepting responsibility as supervising architect for the practice, Binkiewicz had failed to adequately supervise the architectural work of a colleague in respect of the relevant project; failed to ensure the work carried out by MC2 Architects and Designers on the project was under the control and management of a registered person; failed to identify himself to the clients as the architect at the practice and, finally, failed to ensure that complainants were informed of their right to complain to ARB.
Binkiewicz argued that he had been out of the country for a prolonged period when his colleague had accepted the contract in question and he had known nothing about its existence. The first allegation was found unproved.
However, the committee found the second and third allegations proved, accepting unchallenged evidence from the complainants that they were never made aware of Binkiewicz’s identity as the architect at the practice.
Further, Binkiewicz had failed to make any arrangements for the management of the architectural work throughout his lengthy absence. The committee was also satisfied the complainants had not been informed of the board’s disciplinary sanction.
On deciding penalty, the committee took account of the fact that Binkiewicz expressed regret.
It also acknowledged that the relevant contract had been entered into without his knowledge and that he had suffered from ill health at the relevant time. In such circumstances, it decided that the appropriate sanction in this case would be a reprimand.