This fuss about when the title 'architect' can be used following the recent Baden Hellard case, seems to me to be a storm in a teacup. Anyone wishing to practise as an architect, or to continue to call themselves an architect, in retirement or when engaged in another activity, needs to be registered with the ARB as the legal registration body and to pay a small annual subscription for the privilege.
(The ARB has confirmed that there is no legal requirement for PII if an architect is not practising).
Membership of the RIBA or other association of architects has always been voluntary, but some kind of directive needs to be given to discourage members from using FRIBA, ARIBA etc, to avoid confusion among clients and the public, these affixes having been replaced many years ago by the all-embracing 'RIBA'. The Baden Hellard case simply establishes that the affix RIBA cannot be used without ARB registration - which seems no bad thing, to avoid the obvious confusion.
If it is not already, the RIBA should simply make it a requirement that registration with the ARB as the legal authority is a precondition of initial membership or continuing membership, in line with the legal position.
DAVID RAVEN Cambridge