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'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.


Fake architect fined following ARB probe


To all CIAT members. How does your qualification lead to that as an architect? IT DOESN'T, you would need to start from the start. it is the term 'Architectural Services' that is a loophole in the law. RIBA Part 1 students are more qualified than CIAT members in the role of architect, FACT, and they have at least three more years of study and training to go before becoming architects. After my Part 1 I could design buildings (in fact my pet cat can legally design buildings) but I was not an architect. Being an Engineer, Surveyor or Technologist requires NO qualifications. THAT is where the law is wrong, in allowing unqualified people to practice in any business. In my experience the general public already believe it is a requirement in law to be qualified to design buildings, so not a big leap. The number of people who accuse my profession of being to blame for failings (tower blocks, John Poulson, Grenfell etc etc) when it was non-architects who were guilty is frightening. As a Chartered Technologist you are qualified as such, nothing more. Which, until the name change, only needed an HND/HNC level of education to be an 'architectural' technologist, the course contents haven't changed as far as I can tell from the syllabuses. If being CIAT qualified you as an architect you would be able to register as one by taking the ARB/RIBA exams, so why don't you try? To consider offering 'architectural' services as equal to that of being an architect is arrogant beyond belief. For the offence of breaking the law the ARB (and Government) need to get the fine increased and upgraded to a mandatory prison sentence for fraud. I would have thought the Government would have learnt it's lesson when unqualified 'financial advisors' caused the crash a decade ago causing them to make it illegal for them to practice. Was Grenfell not enough?

Posted date

20 September, 2018

Posted time

12:06 pm


Job of the week

AJ Jobs