Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

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

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Bristol architect suspended from register over inadequate drawings

ARB graphic logo2

A Bristol architect has been suspended from the Architects Register for a year after providing a client with incomplete drawings and for failing to have professional indemnity insurance

The client lodged a complaint with the ARB against Matthew Deering, of Matthew Deering Architects, after a contractor said it was unable to give a fee for work due to the lack of detail in the architectural drawings. 

The designs were for a new dentist surgery and had already received planning permission from Carlisle City Council. 

The drawings by Deering contained no reference to any materials or finishes, internally or externally. They also omitted structural specifications and construction detail. And they failed to specify the height of the first floor and the pitch of the roof.

The ARB’s inquirer into the complaint said Deering’s lack of detail in the drawings amounted to a ‘significant degree of incompetence’.

The client eventually had to employ a new architect to do better versions of the drawings.

During an investigation into Deering, the ARB also found that he did not have professional indemnity insurance, as he had been unable to renew his previous policy after it expired.

Deering admitted he had not provided his client with terms of engagement, produced adequate drawings and designs, nor properly dealt with his client’s complaint. He has been suspended from the Architects Register for one year.


Readers' comments (2)

  • John Kellett

    The lack of insurance is a serious issue but the report makes no mention of whether Matthew has been asked to provide construction drawings. Many clients proceed to tender on planning drawings and the contractor quite rightly complains, but the architect is not at fault as they were never appointed to prepare the construction information. This report is incomplete!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If one reads the full ARB case transcript, Matthew Deering admitted that he had not set out terms of employment, did not have PI insurance, and did not provide adequate drawings, specifications & etc for the purposes agreed.
    However the situation was complex with a "specialist company that designs dental practices" who were involved before Matthew Deering was appointed.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.