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.


RIBA report reveals shocking cost of bidding on Official Journal tenders


We all hate the process but seem paralysed to act in unison to change it. Our profession is being bled dry by this mindless waste of time - whilst a new sinister breed of "consultants" clean up; consultants who either advise clients on how to set PQQs up or advise architects on how to beat the system (often at the same time). The result is a restrictive lack of competition with the same select band of firms appearing on lists time and again: surely the antithesis of the whole ethos of OJEU notices? These consultants have also taken the "risk" away from clients by marking PQQ submissions on their behalf - how is this legal, what process did they go through and what indemnity are they asked to carry for their decisions? Perhaps the RIBA might consider how Chartered Practice status could provide all the checks and balances a client needs - leaving the choice down to who they think will answer the brief in the best way? Perhaps architects might consider some form of collaborative subversive action if normal channels fail? Here's a thought: what if a "ghost" consortium was to legally challenge the wording on every PQQ issued...stripping them down to "are you an architect, please tick yes or no"?

Posted date

24 May, 2012

Posted time

8:58 am


Job of the week

AJ Jobs