Skehill of M Skehill Architect Ltd in North London was issued with a reprimand following a finding of unacceptable professional conduct (UPC) at a hearing of ARB’s Professional Conduct Committee (PCC)
The PCC heard that Skehill had been instructed to design a two bedroom flat below his client’s house in North London. The architect was also appointed as contract administrator for the excavation phase for the project. The client complained to ARB after the architect left the project before the excavation phase was complete, and failed to respond to her emails.
It was alleged that Skehill failed to provide accurate drawings, failed to communicate adequately with his client, did not appropriately administer the building contract and did not complete the service that he was contracted to provide. Skehill admitted he did not complete the service that he was contracted to provide.
On consideration of the evidence, the PCC found the architect had not failed to provide accurate drawings, and neither had he failed to fulfil his obligations under the building contracts. There had been unacceptable failures to respond to communications, but none so serious that they might amount to the serious threshold of UPC. The architect admitted that he had abandoned the contract before its conclusion, and the PCC found that this failing did amount to UPC.
Having taken note of Skehill’s good disciplinary history, his positive engagement with the disciplinary process, his apology to his former client, his genuine insight into his failing and accompanying remedial steps to avoid recurrence, the PCC considered that a reprimand was the appropriate and proportionate sanction.
