SPECIAL! ACANews NEW YEAR 2025 by brianwaters1

ACANews NEW YEAR 2025

Old Andy’s Almanac for 2025 page 4

What is the FAC-1 framework alliance contract?

David Mosey page 5

WISHING ALL OUR MEMBERS A VERY

Grenfell exposed the fatal flaws of design and build Tony Bingham page 10

ACA President Patrick Inglis on a productive year

FROM THE PRESIDENT

From the President

2024 has been a busy year for the ACA and I am proud of the many initiatives that we have launched during the course of the year. This has included the new Principal Designer Register, a revamped version of the Standard Form of Appointment and a ground-breaking subscription service for the SFA and our PSA appointment as well as a numerous events and responses to consultations on behalf of members.

Planning Reform

This year began with construction in a recession. The downturn has lasted most of the year and as a result it has been a difficult year for many architectural practices. A modest recovery is forecast for next year, but nothing like a boom seems likely any time soon.

Against this backdrop the government has promised to get Britain building again. However, it is not at all clear this will be successful given the failure of the planning system to deliver planning approvals in a reasonable timeframe. Even on schemes where planning is eventually granted the combination of high interest rates and high construction costs has far too often undermined the viability of many projects.

The government is right to focus on the planning system as a fundamental impediment to building more homes and many of the changes being discussed would be welcome. However, as yet there is no sign that the government is going to tackle one of the significant issues jamming the system, which is the relentless loading up the planning system with policies requiring endless expensive reports, which the planners are not qualified to assess. Duplication of legislation is rife with everything from fire safety to energy efficiency being firstly judged at planning and then again for Building Regulations. This is expensive for applicants and planners, causes significant delay to applications and is completely unnecessary.

The ACA view is that all aspects of building projects should be signed off at the right time in the process. Issues which affect other adjoining properties such as appearance, use, traffic, privacy, outlook etc should be assessed at planning, but anything technical, which only affects the project internally, such as energy efficiency, fire safety etc, should be assessed at the Building Regulations stage. This would go a long way towards addressing the chronic underfunding of the system by taking workload off planners and generally making the planning application process quicker and cheaper for all. This will be one of the main focusses

of the ACA in the coming year, so if you have any views let us know and get involved.

Principal Designer

This year the ACA launched its Principal Designer Register to assist members to promote their services in this vital role. Today we are publishing Principal Designer templates for members to use and in the New Year we will continue to launch initiatives on this and support members to transition to the new regime.

The Principal Designer role is a major opportunity for architects to take back control over construction projects and earn additional fees. As a profession we must embrace this opportunity and make the most of it. If you are not already acting as Principal Designer on your projects you probably should be. In particular if you are lead designer on a project the expectation is that you will be the Principal Designer.

New ARB Code of Conduct

The ACA has recently responded to the ARB consultation on a new Code of Conduct on behalf of members. Unfortunately we have significant concerns about the new code. In particular the repeated use of broad and ill-defined language in many standards as well as un-caveated absolute terms such as “must” will potentially expose architects to unwarranted complaints and sanctions. We therefore do not think that many of the standards are reasonable as currently worded and have responded as such to the ARB. Our specific comments on each standard are set out later in the newsletter.

New Forms of Appointment

The ACA this year has relaunched the classic SFA form of appointment for architects in an easy to use digital format. Both the SFA and the PSA form of appointment for small projects have also been launched in a new subscription format. The subscripting allows members unlimited use of the appointment document, which is highly cost effective and will pay for itself even if you only use a handful of appointments every year. More details on the ACA website.

Lastly I want to wish members a Happy Christmas and extend my thanks to members, council and Melanie for all their support.

The President

Inglis

2 From the President Patrick Inglis on a productive year 4 ACAPAG planning report Old Andy’s Almanac for 2025

5 Professor David Mosey What is the FAC-1 framework alliance contract?

8 Oh to be a planner... Letter from the Minister to the RTPI

10 Tony Bingham Grenfell exposed the fatal flaws of design & build contracts

11 Annual Planning Update 2025

12 Principal Designer update Building Regulations Principal Designer Competence Statement; A Guide to Your Role and Responsibilities as a Domestic Client

16 Council and officers

17 Business support for members – Robert Peake Rethinking sustainable growth for UK architecture practices

20 Andy Hastie R&D tax relief for architects, by architects

21 Subscription service expands to the new SFA24 agreement

22 GALLERY: SASI Studio Ltd - Mattia Santi

25 BSA Principal Designer and PII – Laurence Paddock of Howden

28 Collaborative Procurement: The FAC-1 Handbook; Gold Standard frameworks – Professor David Mosey 30 ACA overlay to the RIBA Plan of Work 31 ARB: proposed new Code of Conduct: The ACA response 35 Architectural appointments New small and simple works appointment agreement out now! 36 ACA CPD events

ACA Forms of Appointment

ACA publications

New members

ACAPAG PLANNING REPORT

ACA excellence in practice

Old Andy’s Almanac for 2025

Andy Rogers has polished up the ACAPAG crystal ball...

Andrew Rogers is Chairman of ACAPAG and a fomer partner in the Manser Practice

January: 6th

High Court rules that planning permission is required for the construction of a snowman following Richmond upon Thames Council’s appeal against an Inspector’s dismissal of their enforcement action: costs awarded against Christopher Robin (aged 8). 11th Consortium of American and Chinese businessmen invest £200bn in new housing on condition that half can be built on green belt land; Rachel Reeves says “This is just what our country needs”. 31st Government defers publication of the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF); Angela Rayner says “We already have too much red tape – more research into the possible unintended consequences of the revisions is required”. Heatwave removes snowmen; parts of the grey-green belt turning brown.

February: 14th

National Trust executive merged with English Heritage to form NTEH; Kier Starmer declares “This just shows what can be done on Valentine’s Day”. 15th Not to be outdone, the CPRE joins up with the TCPA. 16th Rachel Reeves proposes that MHCLG should become part of the Treasury, renamed as DHMI (Department of Housing and Mega Investment). 20th Hammersmith Bridge sold to Elon Musk, to be transported to Las Vegas; London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham refuses planning permission for a new ferry terminal to restore the river crossing. Heatwave continues – hosepipe ban imposed throughout England and Wales.

March: 13th

NTEH agrees proposed alliance with the American-Chinese consortium to develop 100 acres of historic parkland sites for new housing. 21st Angela Rayner announces that all existing agricultural buildings can now be converted to offices, shops, houses, spas, health clubs (or any other use that can be imagined) without planning permission. 31st Government defers decision on having a referendum about rejoining the EU the day after announcing one; Kier Starmer says “We cannot consider voting on an issue as important as this when we don’t know what the answer will be”. Snow ends the heatwave but the hosepipe ban remains in force.

April:

2nd

Following a case brought by Taylor-Wimpy the Supreme Court rules that paying for pre-application planning advice is effectively a bribe and is therefore illegal. 9th Matthew Pennycook says that the revised NPPF will confirm Hokey Cokey status of Housing Associations (first in, then out, then shaken all

about). 13th Hundredth anniversary of Sheffield United winning the FA Cup Final. 30th Government defers publication of the NPPFramework yet again. Floods, tempest, hurricane.

May: 3rd

Michael Gove re-elected as an MP with an increased majority; Boris Johnson retires to the Greek Islands; Sir Alex Ferguson elected mayor of Manchester. 31st Government defers decision on restricting low-cost alcohol sales and announces that public houses will be treated as agricultural buildings, with no use restrictions, but revised opening hours (noon to 2pm and 6pm to 10.30). Showers.

June: 1st

Country closes down for a five-day holiday celebrating the anniversary of King Charles’s coronation; Kemi Badenoch suggests that all public sector workers should ignore the holiday as a mark of protest against something or other. 6th King’s honours list includes peerages for Chris Hoy, Alex Ferguson and Boris Johnson. 25th European Court rules that bats and badgers must be consulted before being relocated in accordance with new Animal Rights legislation. 30th Government defers decision on changes to the Use Classes Order to allow homes in place of religious premises. Hail, wind.

July: 1st

Ukraine win the European Cup Final, beating Russia 5-0. 11th Matthew Pennycook rules that planning committee members will in future be tested for a sense of humour. 31st Government defers decisions on a new crossing over the Lower Thames, implementation of recommendations for school dinners by Jamie Oliver, a review of the appeals process, and increasing motorway speed limits; Kier Starmer says “We are concentrating our efforts on the completion of half a million affordable new homes by the American-Chinese consortium”. Sunny periods.

August: 6th

Metropolitan Police explain procedures for the closure of the City of London, most of the capital’s public transport and all London theatres to combat the threat of terrorism in the days before the proposed visit of Donald Trump. 31st Government defers decision on the implementation of new Community Infrastructure Levy (to be renamed Rich Land Tax) tariffs. Rain and hail.

September: 3rd

Slimmed down NPPF finally published; it has a total of 21 pages,

THE FRAMEWORK ALLIANCE CONTRACT

three of which contain a comprehensive definition of sustainable development. 4th 1APP planning application forms reduced to 3 pages, with no requirement for additional material upfront. 5th Angela Rayner announces that any Local Development Plan with more than 10 pages will be automatically rejected. 6th Local authorities limited to a maximum of three conservation areas each. 7th Pigs seen flying over Westminster. 20th 350 pages of explanatory notes published, to accompany the NPPF. Hot weather and flooding.

October: 1st

Government defers decision on changes to British Summer Time; Scottish parliament defers decision on another referendum for independence. 28th Department of Transport report recommends relocating Stonehenge to the Yorkshire Moors as part of the levelling-up agenda; “This will solve traffic problems by allowing the A303 to be rebuilt as a dual carriageway” says a spokesperson. Sun, rain, wind and hail.

November: 5th

Use Classes Order abolished; Angela Rayner says “People understand their own needs best: they don’t want burdensome rules that assume land use issues in every town, village and hamlet are the same”; Rachel Reeves says “This change will boost the stagnant economy and bring Localism to individual sites”; Kemi Badenoch calls it “A charter for lawyers to resurrect the laws of nuisance”. 30th Government defers the abolition of permitted development rights for churches, mosques and cathedrals. Record snowfalls in Scotland.

December: 3rd

The GLA grants planning permission for a new Estuary Airport, paid for with a surcharge on every plane flying over GLA airspace, privatisation of BAA and the release of land at Heathrow for a new Garden City. 12th Lord Ferguson predicts that his House of Lords team will win next year’s Civil Service football tournament. 31st Government defers decision on the Northern Line extension, the demolition and reconstruction of Euston Station and new airport runways in the South East. Heatwave results in the third hosepipe ban of the year, widespread flooding. n

What is the FAC-1 framework alliance contract?

The Centre of Construction Law and Dispute Resolution developed the Framework Alliance Contract (FAC-1) in consultation with over 120 organisations in 2016, in response to addressing ongoing issues within the construction industry.

Professor David Mosey breaks down the FAC-1 contract and reflects on its adoption within the industry.

Frameworks are an established means for the delivery of multiple construction projects, and a framework contract can describe:

• Systems by which successive projects will be planned, designed and built

• Investments and rewards expected by the parties

• 'Agreed measures of the parties’ performance

• Machinery for the parties to review and improve what they provide.

While a well-integrated team can achieve good value and avoid disputes on a single project, the same team can generate stronger relationships and achieve greater long-term benefits on multiple projects. A framework creates more scope for improved value to be achieved on multiple projects because it attracts increased personal commitment and investment, because framework members can plan with a clearer understanding of potential additional work, and because framework members can be expected to learn from project to project. This overcomes the ‘Groundhog Day’ of lost learning from one project to the next.

However, framework contracts have often been neglected as vehicles for integrating teams and improving value. Instead, they have often been used cynically as short cuts to market and as a means to attract lower prices by exaggerating the potential pipeline of work. For example, without clear contractual relationships and processes that govern the fair award of work and the measurement of value, a

framework can quickly break down and give rise to disillusionment and distrust.

What is different about FAC-1?

The FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract (‘FAC-1’) integrates the activities of consultants, contractors, suppliers and other industry organisations engaged on a project or a programme of works, services or supplies of any size or type, and it aligns

THE FRAMEWORK ALLIANCE CONTRACT

ACA excellence in practice

their interests with the interests of clients. It creates a multi-party umbrella that sets out agreed processes for planning, value improvement, contract award, performance review, problem-solving and shared learning. FAC-1 describes a range of systems designed to achieve value improvement, risk management and net zero carbon targets in any sector and any jurisdiction.

FAC-1 addresses the tendency to compartmentalise the skills applied to the strategy, procurement, contracting and management stages of a complex project or programme of works, which can lead to the loss of valuable information acquired at each stage. FAC-1 connects all these stages through a transparent multi-party structure that integrates all contributors and provides a consistent basis for collaborative practices and exchanges of experience.

FAC-1 was developed by King’s Centre of Construction Law & Dispute Resolution and the Association of Consultant Architects through consultation with 120 organisations in 14 jurisdictions and was published in 2016. It has been used by private and public sector organisations on projects and programmes of works, services and supplies ranging in value from £5 million to £30 billion.

Further information in relation to FAC-1 can be accessed in The FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract: A Handbook which was published by LPP in 2023.

Is FAC-1 recognised?

Over the eight years to 2024, FAC-1 has been adopted on procurements with a total value of over £100 billion. It has attracted widespread recognition in the UK and internationally because it creates clear commercial systems that reach beyond the traditional role of contracts and that enhance the work of individual team members.

Since 2020 FAC-1 has been recognised in the UK Government ‘Construction Playbook’ as ‘a good example of a standard form framework contract that can achieve …many of the ambitions set out in this Playbook’, supported by the 50 industry signatories to that Playbook.

In 2024 the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development published guidance recommending the use of FAC-1 as an integrator for multiple FIDIC project contracts.

Also, in 2024 the NEC (New Engineering Contract) published guidance recommending the

use of FAC-1 as an integrator for multiple NEC project contracts.

How does FAC-1 work?

FAC-1 is a multi-party umbrella contract that is designed to be used in conjunction with any number of consultancy agreements, construction contracts and specialist appointments and that describes the relationships and processes that these other contracts are not designed to cover.

The FAC-1 defined terms are shown in quotation marks in this blog and it describes a range of tested contractual systems for:

• Integrating the roles of 'Alliance Members' through shared 'Objectives, Success Measures and Targets' linked to agreed 'Incentives'

• Awarding any number or range of 'Project Contracts' for works, services or supplies comprising the 'Framework Programme'

• Planning the early engagement of 'Alliance Members' and of wider 'Supply Chain' members in advance of each 'Project' commencing on site

• Programming a 'Timetable of Supply Chain Collaboration' and other 'Alliance Activities' designed to achieve 'Improved Value'

• Capturing learning and improvement from one 'Project' to another

• Managing risks through a shared 'Risk Register' and avoiding disputes through shared preparatory measures and through 'Early Warning' referred to a 'Core Group' of individuals who seek agreed solutions.

FAC-1 enables the agreement and sharing of improvements in quality, safety and net zero carbon while protecting the 'Intellectual Property Rights' and other commercial interests of 'Alliance Members'. It clarifies the relationships between 'Alliance Members' and wider 'Supply Chain' members, and it helps to accelerate progress through the learning gained from exchanges of experience.

FAC-1 can be used as a strategic contract governing a programme of multiple projects or as a single project contractual integrator. It establishes direct links between one or more clients and one or more consultants, contractors, suppliers and other industry organisations as 'Alliance Members', supporting shared systems for improving value and reducing risks and avoiding the fragmentation of relying only on separate two-party contracts.

FAC-1 is designed to be compatible with any 'Project' procurement model and award processes,

and its 'Template Project Documents' govern the delivery of each 'Project' comprising a 'Framework Programme'.

How does FAC-1 differ from other alliance contracts?

FAC-1 is distinct from standalone alliance contracts, such as the ‘PPC2000’ project alliance contract and the ‘TPC2005’ or ‘TAC-1’ term alliance contracts, and these distinctions can be summarised as follows:

• A ‘framework alliance contract’ links multiple other contracts and integrates a multi-party team engaged on one or more projects, so that the team can use lessons learned on each project to improve the delivery of other projects

• A ‘project alliance contract’ such as PPC2000 is a standalone contract that integrates a multi-party team who are brought together to deliver a single project

• A ‘term alliance contract’ such as TPC2005 or TAC-1 is a standalone contract that integrates a multi-party team through multiple orders placed for agreed tasks so that the team can use lessons learned on each order to improve the delivery of other orders.

FAC-1, as a framework alliance contract, describes the multi-party relationships, commitments and systems that improve the procurement, integration, management and delivery of:

• The multiple projects comprising one or more programmes of works, services or supplies

• The multiple parts of one or more complex projects

• The different contributions to a project using digital information management through building information management and related digital technologies

• Long-term commitments through a public private partnership

• The works, services or supplies awarded by tier 1 contractors to their supply chain members.

What is the structure of FAC-1?

The FAC-1 'Framework Alliance Contract' comprises a set of 'Framework Documents', as summarised below, which are listed in the 'Framework Alliance Agreement' (Page i) and which are ‘subject to addition and amendment in accordance with any 'Joining Agreements' and the Contract Terms.’

The 'Contract Terms' can be grouped around the following themes:

• 'Alliance' integration: clauses 1,10,11 and 13, Schedules 1 and 6 and Annex 2

• 'Project' procurement: clauses 4,5 and 7, Schedules 4 and5 and Annex 3

• 'Improved Value': clauses 2,6 and 8 and Schedules 1 and 2

• 'Alliance' management: clauses 3,9,12,14 and 15, Schedule 3 and Annex 4.

The 'Framework Alliance Agreement' is completed with details by reference to the numbered clauses of the 'Contract Terms' (pages i to v) and is signed by all 'Alliance Members' (pages vi and vii).

The FAC-1 'Framework Brief' is issued to prospective industry 'Alliance Members', in response to which each prospective industry 'Alliance Member' submits its 'Framework Proposals' and 'Framework Prices'.

FAC-1 provides for controls over the 'Framework Documents' which include:

• Under clauses 1.3.3 and 13.3.2 the 'Framework Prices' and 'Framework Proposals' are binding only between the 'Client', the 'Alliance Manager' and the other individual 'Alliance Member' who submits them, and are confidential between that limited group of 'Alliance Members'

• Under clause 1.4 the responsibility of each 'Alliance Member' is limited to those 'Framework Documents' that it prepares or contributes to, except to the extent of its stated reliance on information provided by other 'Alliance Members'

• Under clause 1.5.3, in the event of any discrepancy, a 'Project Contract' takes precedence over the 'Framework Documents'.

Who is using FAC-1?

FAC-1 has been adopted on procurements which cover airfield, asset management, custodial, education, energy, environmental, health, highways, housing, infrastructure, maritime and public buildings. For example, FAC-1 has been used for:

• Alliances governing construction works and services, modern methods of construction (‘MMC’) and materials/ equipment supplies such as those led by Crown Commercial Service

• ‘Sub-Alliances’ for multiple complex projects such as the Sub-Alliance led by Ministry of Justice under a Crown Commercial Service overarching alliance

• Energy alliances and other alliances for a com-

plex project such as those led by Enel Green Power

• Health sector alliances such as those led by NHS Improvement and NHS Shared Business Services

• Housing alliances such as those led by Futures Housing Group, SCMG and Haringey Council

• Highways alliances such as those led by Surrey County Council and Oxfordshire County Council

• Manufacturing and offsite construction alliances such as those led by the Football Foundation and Building Better

• Regional alliances and alliances for small and medium-sized enterprises (‘SMEs’) such as those led by LHC

• Public private partnership (‘PPP’) alliances such as the one led by University of Milan and

Lendlease

• 'Supply Chain' alliances such as those led by Kier

• A new collaborative contract for any ‘fusion’ project, which is currently being developed by Fusion for Energy.

Case studies that include the above procurements appear with detailed guidance on FAC-1 in The FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract: A Handbook published by Kings College London, 12th August 2024.

Professor David Mosey CBE FICE is Professor of Law, Centre of Construction and Dispute Resolution, Kings College London. n

LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE RTPI

Matthew Pennycook MP Minister of State

Ministry of

Housing,

Communities & Local Government 4th Floor, Fry Building 2 Marsham Street

London SW1P 4DF

www.gov.uk/mhclg

12 December 2024

To: Lindsey Richards, President Royal Town Planning Institute

The vital role of professional planners in building the homes we need

We inherited a housing crisis. The average new home is out of reach for the average worker, housing costs consume a third of private renters’ income, and the number of children in temporary accommodation is at a historic high. Yet just 220,000 new homes were built last year and the number of homes granted planning permission has fallen to its lowest in a decade.

We have acted with the urgency this crisis demands. We published a consultation on a revised National Planning Policy Framework within a month of gaining office, proposing measures to reverse anti-supply changes introduced in December 2023 and in their place setting out progrowth reforms. These included ambitious new housebuilding targets and a modernised Green Belt policy, alongside a wider set of changes designed to boost the supply of land and better meet community needs.

Today we publish a revised, pro-growth National Planning Policy Framework. This marks the next step in delivering on our promise to radically reform the planning system. The measures set out below build on more than 10,000 consultation responses and extensive engagement with business, local government and wider housing and development stakeholders. Taken together, they reflect our commitment not to duck the hard choices that must be confronted in order to tackle the housing crisis – because the alternative is a future in which a decent, safe, secure and affordable home is a privilege enjoyed only by some rather than being the right of all working people.

I wanted to write to you directly to reiterate my enormous respect for the planning profession. The perseverance with which I have seen local authority planners shape and build communities in their local areas is truly admirable, and something I continue to hold great respect for. It is only with this dedication that we will be able to tackle our national housing emergency, generate the sustainable economic growth needed for the prosperity of our country, and improve the living standards of working people.

We acknowledge that many of the reforms announced today represent significant changes in the planning process and may also place extra pressure on planning authorities, and indeed planners

ACA PLANNING

themselves. Therefore, I wanted to make it clear that the Government remains committed to enhancing the capacity and capability of local planning authorities. In light of this we will move swiftly to implement the fee increases for development management services we consulted on, as well as take forward further reforms to enable localised fee setting.

I am also able to confirm we have set aside over £14.8m to provide grant funding to local authorities to implement our policy changes in the immediate months, as well as the additional £49m secured to support the roll out of planning reform in 2025/26. This comes on top of the additional £50 million announced at Budget to boost capacity in the planning system.

This £14.8m will be provided to local authorities that are at an advanced stage of the local plan making process (Regulation 19 stage), and that will need to revise their draft plans to accommodate the increase in their local housing need figures as a result of our changes. The funding will also provide support to local authorities that will need to undertake a Green Belt review, based on updated guidance that we intend to publish in the New Year. Local planning authorities will be invited to submit an Expression of Interest (EOI) form by 17 January 2025 to request a share of these funds. The Chief Planner will write to local authorities on this matter early next week.

This support should be seen alongside the wider recruitment and retention initiatives that are already having an impact in the sector. These include the Pathways to Planning programme run by the LGA, which continues to see new graduates placed into local planning authorities, as well as the funding provided to grow the work of Public Practice in placing senior built environment professionals into the public sector.

Only by delivering these reforms will we unlock investment and delivery. It is also vital that, alongside the appropriate infrastructure, these reforms also deliver substantial affordable housing. It is vital that local communities can see the benefits of development in terms of enhancements to public services and more affordable housing for local people. We recognise that to deliver on these reforms we will need to work in partnership with local leaders, housebuilders and infrastructure developers to deliver investment into these sectors, and we are grateful for the support for these proposals from across the sector.

It’s an exciting time to be a planner as we shape our places to meet the needs of our communities, to support economic growth and address nature recovery and climate change. We look forward to continuing to work with planners across the sector to proactively deliver positive change.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Pennycook MP Minister of State

Grenfell exposed the fatal flaws of design & build contracts

Design responsibility should not be forced onto the shoulders of builders, especially subcontractors, argues Tony Bingham. First published in Building Design with kind consent of BD and the author

I suggest that the Grenfell report of September 2024 is the most important and helpful lid to be taken off our building industry. Take a look at volume 4, part 6 of the Phase 2 report. It tells you about the very ordinary behaviour of architects, builders, subcontractors and sub-subcontractors. That’s a narrower focus than the whole report. But it gets to grips with how we do the work on site. Oh, and let me say this: none of it will come as a surprise to experienced builders.

And also let me say that if you think that getting a builder to design and build is a good idea (as I once did), then abandon that thought. Grenfell tells me that it’s not wise to place contracts with folk who build and then lumber the otherwise good builder with design too. Stop it.

JCT message: scrap the JCT Design and Build Contract documents. Sling them out of your stable as a mark of respect for the report and for the 72 dead. That’s only one plea; there are more, but that’s an easy and goodwill start. I mean it: ban design and build building contracts.

The committee of inquiry were utterly appalled by the incompetence of the contractor to manage the design… they looked at a contractual flag saying ‘design and build’. But the builder is and was a builder – a putter-upper

My theme is simple. The design, the specification, the materials, even the method of working is the job of those who are up to their ears with professional gongs that tell us they are qualified to design buildings. It takes ages to become an architect, an engineer, a professional. Ages because the job is ever so complicated. They have to know all the inside track of regulations, performance, standards, risks. The designer even has to know – and say in the specification – how the assembly of the item is to be carried out.

The builder is the putter-upper. Repeat that, please. It’s not glib, not demeaning to call the builder a putter-upper. It’s a bloody difficult job. My

builder has to find capable, talented actual putteruppers to do the job… to follow the specification, to work in iffy weather and iffy site conditions. My builder has to scrabble around to cope with change orders, duff materials, dilatory and slow information. And then the JCB hits hard rock… No builder has any room to find design solutions, nor investigate a specification.

The Grenfell committee heaped flak on the building contractor. After all, it had entered into a JCT Design and Build Contract, but, the report said, its team “did not have sufficient knowledge of the Building Regulations or approved Document B”. It “gave inadequate thought to fire safety, to which it displayed a casual attitude throughout the project and its systems for managing the design work did not ensure that its subcontractors and consultants properly understood their different responsibilities”. It “failed to co-ordinate the design work properly”.

I gained the impression that the committee of inquiry were utterly appalled by the incompetence of the building contractor to manage the design. I confess that I am not at all surprised by what I will call this limited competence of the builder. The company had contractually stepped into the design obligations but its staff had no design qualifications to speak of. They may have stumbled on those Building Regs and more beside; but no matter the familiarity, they were not qualified, not competent.

So, who should design? Only those who are qualified by examination and have the certificate on their wall

The committee of inquiry looked at a contractual flag saying “design and build”. But the builder is and was a builder – a putter-upper. The builder was further lambasted for casting itself as merely the “the leader of the orchestra”. It let out the work and design to subcontract companies that were also putter-uppers… experienced putter-uppers. It followed that the cladding works, via the

cladding installer “did not concern itself sufficiently with fire safety at any stage of the refurbishment”. And it “appears to have thought that there was no need for it to do so, because others involved in the project, and ultimately building control, would ensure that the design was safe”. “It failed to ask the kind of questions about the materials being considered that a reasonably competent cladding contractor would have asked.”

The committee of inquiry were shocked by the lack of technical and performance and design ability of the subcontractor. I am not. Look, many a subcontractor begins life as a chap who was “on the tools”. He learns, for example, how the cladding is installed – same goes for most trades. The firm gradually prospers, expands and thrives. Soon an enquiry turns up calling for “design and install subcontract”. The main contractor demands that all performance obligations, whether express or implied, fall on the shoulders of the subcontractor. I guarantee you that our subcontractor does not understand the scope, the burden of design and install. The committee of inquiry is highly critical of the cladding contractor because the committee see that it took on design and install. But the true position is that very few subcontractors of any sort have professional design qualifications. (True, though, the M&E end of our industry is good at design.) So the remedy is never to place design on the putter-upper subcontractor or main contractor. That’s reality.

So, who should design? Only those who are qualified by examination and have the certificate on their wall. There is nothing to stop our qualified folk having lots of dialogue with the putter-upper. That is how it used to work with “nominated subcontractors”. But in any case, having a cladding fellow (or whatever bod) that the designer can “have a word with” is in good order, but don’t, please don’t ask a putter-upper to investigate performance or specification or any design. n

Annual Planning Update

afternoon conference a joint Forum with the ACA and CULS

Tuesday 25th March 2025 1.30 for 2pm start at Dentons, Fleet Place EC4

Book now at https://www.culandsoc.com/events/9108/ www.culandsoc.com

Principal Designer update

In May, we launched the ACA Principal Designer Register which allows our Members to promote to Clients that they have the ability to act as Principal Designer for Building Regulations and demonstrate they have competencies and experience to take on this role.

In continued support of our Members, we have published the PD Register content hub which is located in the ACA Members Area; here you will find a logo for use on your website and stationery, guidance and articles on the role. We will continue to update information on the content hub as developments occur.

You can refer your Clients to the PD register, however, we would recommend you also develop a personal statement which you can give your Clients or Building Control outlining the self certification process you are required to follow when registering:

• You are aware of and understand the duties of and competencies required of a Principal Designer as set out in PAS 8671 and SI 2023/911.

• You are aware of the duties of a Principal Designer under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015.

• You can evidence if required of your experience in leading and /or co-ordinating a design team in preparing Building Regulations level information.

• You have done and will continue to undertake CPD on

• the role of the Building Regulations (BSA) Principal Designer

• the revised Building Regulations approvals procedure (Gateways 1,2,3)

• recent and ongoing changes to the Building Regulations.

• You will ensure that the client is aware of their own duties under the relevant legislation before taking up any appointment as PD.

• You will not accept any appointment as PD where you are not the designer with control over the design work as required by PAS 8671 and SI 2023/911.

The criteria may evolve as the industry navigates through the requirements of the PD role.

There is no registration fee and the annual registration fee is just £100 per year; this nominal fee allows the ACA to maintain and update the register in accordance with the latest guidance and information. n

From the New Year in the members’ area of the website you will find these guidance notes. The first is a template for your Building Regulations Principal Designer Competence Statement. The second (next page) is advice you need to give to your domestic client.

Building Regulations Principal Designer Competence Statement

Practice Name:

Practice Address:

Email:

Website: Tel:

This document sets out the competence of PRACTICE NAME to act as Building Regulations Principal Designer.

The competence criteria for Principal Designers is set out in PAS 8671, which can be found here.

PRACTICE NAME is registered with the Association of Consultant Architects Principal Designer Registerwww.principaldesigner.uk

PRACTICE NAME’s Designated Individuals under the regulations are NAME/s. Their individual Competence Statements are below.

Individual Principal Designer Competence Statement

Date:

Architect Name:

Practice Name:

Position:

Education / Experience / Training

Education and Qualifications:

Relevant Project Experience:

Behavioural Competence as PAS 8670

1a) Ethical Behaviour

Architects are required to act ethically and professionally at all times in accordance with the ARB Code of Conduct. Registered Architects are therefore compliant with the competency requirements for acting as Principal Designer as set out in PAS 8671 & 8670. Add / Edit as appropriate

1b) Leadership, Teamwork & Communication

Architects are trained to act as Lead Designer, are already experienced in this role, and therefore inherently qualified to lead the design team with attendant teamwork and communications skills. Registered Architects are therefore compliant with the competency requirements for acting as Principal Design as set out in PAS 8671 & 8670. Add / Edit as appropriate

1c) Managing Individual Competence

ARB registration requires mandatory CPD including annual training on the Principal Designer role, Building Regulations, Fire Safety, Project Management etc. Registered Architects by doing this, are therefore compliant with the competency requirements for acting as Principal Design as set out in PAS 8671 & 8670. Add / Edit as appropriate

1d) Personal Responsibility and Accountability

Architects are required to act ethically and professionally at all times in accordance with the ARB Code of Conduct. Registered Architects. Registered Architects are therefore compliant with the competency requirements for acting as Principal Design as set out in PAS 8671 & 8670. Add / Edit as appropriate

1e) Respect Duty of Care to Others

Architects are required to act in accordance with the ARB Code of Conduct, which set out standards for respect and duty of care to others. Registered Architects are therefore compliant with the competency requirements for acting as Principal Design as set out in PAS 8671 & 8670. Add / Edit as appropriate. n

A Guide to Your Role and Responsibilities as a Domestic Client

The Principal Designer has to advise the client of their responsibilities under the Act

Safety in Construction: A Guide to Your Role and Responsibilities as a Domestic Client

Construction work can be dangerous, but with increased awareness, it has become much safer. Everyone involved has a role to play, including you as the client. Since 1995, the Construction Design and Management Regulations (CDM) have imposed obligations on clients on most construction projects with regards to health and safety. The Building Safety Act 2022 expanded these responsibilities to include Building Regulations requiring additional appointments and documentation at all stages. This guide aims to clarify your duties as a client and the roles that others play under the regulations.

Does This Apply to My Project?

The regulations apply to all construction projects with more than one contractor. In practice most projects involve a sub-contractor and therefore the regulations are likely to apply in all but very simple single trade projects.

Domestic clients are exempt from some duties. However, this exemption only applies to non-business-related works. New houses and alterations to existing ones are considered domestic, but even modest work on commercial buildings or converting a house into flats is not exempt.

These notes apply to domestic projects under 18 meters tall. Additional regulations apply to buildings over 18m and you should seek further guidance on your duties as a client if your project is above this height.

What is your Role as a Client?

For domestic clients, the responsibilities are:

1 Appointing Competent People: Ensure you appoint suitably qualified individuals to design, build, and sign off on the project. You must appoint a Principal Designer and a Principal Contractor in writing.

2 Providing Relevant Information: Share any relevant information you have about the building or its site.

3 Maintaining Records: Keep records of what was built, including maintenance and operating instructions (the Health & Safety File), and share this with anyone working on your building in the future.

What is a Principal Designer?

The Principal Designer coordinates the design team to ensure the project is safe to construct and maintain. The Building Safety Act also requires the Principal Designer to ensure the building as designed complies with the Building Regulations.

What is a Principal Contractor?

The Principal Contractor coordinates the construction phase of the project with regards to health and safety and Building Regulations compliance. Like the Principal Designer, they need to be appointed by you, and you must ensure they are competent. For domestic jobs, if you don’t nominate a Principal Contractor, the role defaults to the contractor, who may not be aware of this responsibility.

What Services will the Principal Designer Provide?

The services the Principal Designer will provide are:

• Planning, Managing, and Monitoring: Plan, manage and monitor the design work during the design phase with respect to compliance with relevant Building and CDM Regulations.

• Coordination: Coordinate matters related to the design work within the project with respect to compliance with relevant Building and CDM Regulations.

• Documentation: Prepare the CDM Pre-Construction Information File and Hazard Register.

• Liaison: Liaise with the Principal Contractor and share relevant information for the planning, management, and monitoring of the building work for the purpose of compliance with Building and CDM Regulations. This includes coordinating building and design work to meet Building Regulations.

• Client Assistance: Assist the client in providing necessary information to other designers and contractors.

• Health & Safety File: Prepare the CDM Health & Safety File.

Where can I find out more?

Guidance for Duty Holders including clients can be found here. The full regulations for Duty Holders including Clients, Principal Designers and Principal Contractors can be found here.

For architects, by architects

R&D tax relief claim assessment and preparation assisted by chartered architects working hand in glove with tax experts.

The sticking point for many architecture practices when assessing and preparing their R&D tax relief claim is the professional language barrier that exists between architects and accountants. Because Invennt’s team includes RIBA qualified architects working hand-in-glove with tax experts we can breakdown this barrier and make R&D tax relief assessment effortless. When paired with our specialist eDiscovery technology, we can be more forensic, produce a more persuasive supporting narrative for HMRC and remove virtually all the burden on our clients.

20% …of eligible practices in the AJ100

£4.8m

…in benefit claimed for architecture practices since 2016

Invennt’s R&D tax relief assessment service has been invaluable to us over many years, thanks to their use of qualified architects who truly understand the technical detail and nuances of our industry. Their expertise made the process seamless and ensured we maximized the benefits. I highly recommend them

John Assael Chairman, Assael Architecture

www.invennt.com

41% …lower HMRC enquiry rate than the industry average.

£18.9m

…of eligible cost identified in architecture practices

Book a Consultation

Please contact Andrew Hastie to find out how Invennt can improve both the process and outcome of recovering R&D tax relief.

Andrew Hastie Head of Marketing & Business Development

Andy.hastie@invennt.com

07948 281 571

COUNCIL AND OFFICERS

Council Members

ACA COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICERS

John Assael DipArch GradDip AA MSc RIBA FRSA, ACArch –Assael Architecture Ltd

johnassael@assael.co.uk Tel: 020 7736 7744

Andrew Catto AADip ACArch HON SECRETARY & IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT

Andrew Catto Architects Ltd

Email: ac@andrewcatto.co.uk Tel: 020 8785 0077

Richard Harrison Dipl Arch Poly ACArch

VICE PRESIDENT richardlharrison@icloud.com Tel: 07973 213426

Patrick Inglis MA(Cantab) DipArch ARB RIBA ACArch

PRESIDENT

Inglis Badrashi Loddo

Email: patrick@ibla.co.uk Tel: 020 7580 8808

Alfred Munkenbeck RIBA ACArch HON TREASURER

Munkenbeck & Partners Architects

Email: alfred@mandp.uk.com Tel: 020 7739 3300

Andrew Rogers AADip ACArch DipTP MRTPI DipEnv&Dev (open)

Andrew Rogers: Planning Email: AR@awrogers.com Tel: 07841 538869

Brian Waters MA DipArch(Cantab) RIBA MRTPI DipTP ACArch PRESS OFFICER The Boisot Waters Cohen Partnership

Email: brian@bwcp.co.uk Tel: 07957871477

Melanie Hern CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER office@acarchitects.co.uk melaniehern@hotmail.com 07500 180973

Alison Low MA DipArch ACArch DIRECTOR OF ENTERPRISE and Vice President

Alison Low Architect alisonlowarchitect@gmail.com 07947 320298

Members interested in joining Council should please contact the President at office@acarchitects.co.uk

STUDENT representative

Joanne Wong (Post-graduate, University of Westminster)

Robert Peake of Management for Design identifies key considerations for the leadership

Rethinking sustainable growth for UK architecture practices

A common misconception about business growth is that it simply involves doing more work, investing more time, and putting in extra effort. For the already overburdened leader of a small or medium-sized architecture practice, this can feel like a distant priority—something to address only after dealing with the immediate demands of projects and clients.

But sustainable growth doesn’t have to mean working harder. Instead, it involves strategic planning and preparation, enabling your firm to achieve its goals without overcommitting or incurring unnecessary overheads. Here are three key areas to focus on when building a foundation for sustainable growth:

1. Increasing Profit: Focus on the Bottom Line

The first step is distinguishing between revenue and profit. Revenue refers to the total income your practice generates from projects, while profit is what remains after all expenses and debts are paid.

However, many firm leaders find that as revenue increases, so do expenses, leaving profits stagnant. This can be frustrating— you’re taking on more work but not seeing any significant financial gain.

To increase profit, you need to widen the gap between revenue and expenses:

• Cut unnecessary costs: Review your outgoings to identify wasteful spending and inefficiencies.

• Boost revenue smartly: Invest in marketing and business development to attract high-value projects and clients that align with your expertise.

By maintaining tight control over expenses while selectively pursuing growth opportunities, you can create a healthier profit margin without overwhelming your resources.

2. Expanding Your Team: Grow Strategically

For many practice leaders, the idea of hiring more staff can feel daunting. It’s a commitment that brings additional responsibilities, from managing people to ensuring a steady pipeline of projects. But growing your team strategically can actually improve your firm’s functionality and resilience.

Key considerations when expanding your team include:

• Recruit for specific needs: Hire people with the right expertise to fill skill gaps and enhance your firm’s capabilities.

• Timing is critical: Scale up when your workload justifies it and when your business development efforts are consistently bringing in opportunities.

A larger team can also make your practice more stable during unforeseen challenges, such as stalled projects or unexpected staff departures. Smaller firms, especially those with fewer than five employees, often struggle to adapt to such events, whereas slightly larger firms have more capacity to absorb disruptions.

3. Enhancing Skills: Invest in Development

The potential for improvement exists at every level of a practice, from junior team members to senior leaders. Investing in skills development not only helps your staff grow but also enhances the overall performance and resilience of your business. Consider:

• Leadership and business skills: These are rarely taught in architecture school but are critical for running a successful practice. Encourage your team—and yourself—to pursue training in these areas.

• A culture of growth: As a leader, model the behaviour you want to see by actively seeking opportunities to improve. Create an environment where ongoing professional development is valued.

By addressing inefficiencies and outdated processes, and ensuring accountability, you can unlock new levels of productivity and creativity across your practice.

Taking Control of Growth

For many small architecture practices, focusing on growth can feel counterintuitive, especially when day-to-day responsibilities already feel overwhelming. However, taking the time to invest in sustainable growth strategies can lead to a new chapter for your firm—one where you feel more in control, more resilient, and better equipped to meet your business goals. By focusing on profit, strategic hiring, and skill development, you can create a practice that not only survives but thrives in the competitive UK architecture market. n

Robert Peake is principal at Management for Design

BUSINESS SUPPORT FOR MEMBERS

ACA has a partnership with Management for Design to provide financial and business management support services to members

if you were to publish a book on architecture, you’d want a publisher on board, but you wouldn’t want the commissioning editor to write the chapter on computational design. The same holds true for R&D tax credits.If you want someone to write cogently about architecture, it’s best to ask an architect.

SUPPORT FOR MEMBERS

R&D tax relief for R&D tax relief for

architects, by architects. architects, by architects.

Is your practice putting the cart before the horse?

Many architecture practices rely on accountants to produce their R&D tax relief claims, with an architect only checking the 昀nished draft. In this article Andy Hastie explains why this process is back to front and how Invennt’s approach helps 昀rms get more value from the scheme.

The Government’s R&D tax relief schemes (R&D tax credits and R&D expenditure credit) 昀nancially support businesses which develop innovative solutions to technical challenges or advance knowledge through research. As a central pilar of Britain’s knowledge economy, architecture is fertile ground for qualifying activity and practices of all sizes and specialisms have taken advantage of the scheme, granting them the 昀nancial 昀exibility to push the envelope and forge ahead with innovative new designs.

Despite this, many 昀rms 昀nd the process arduous, overlook qualifying expenditure and submit supporting information to HMRC that raises more questions than it answers. This is partly because the R&D guidance needs to cover the full spectrum of the British economy, including everything from pharmaceuticals to video games. But it’s also because 昀rms put the cart before the horse, preparing claims with accountants and asking a professional with relevant knowledge of the discipline to check them afterwards.

But when preparing an R&D tax credit claim, the toughest nut to crack is demonstrating beyond doubt that the work undertaken is eligible under HMRC’s rules. Naturally, there is a science to quantifying the costs, but in knowledge industries where most of the eligible expenditure is people’s time (and especially in industries where sta昀 record billable hours) this is a relatively straightforward exercise.

What really makes the di昀erence to an R&D tax relief claim is professional expertise in the 昀eld, and an understanding of the nuances of the sector. A claim produced without expert knowledge frequently becomes an unwelcome distraction to prepare, overlooks qualifying expenditure and triggers lengthy enquiries from HMRC. Whereas all else being equal, a claim prepared by a professional architect will be stress-free, forensically assessed and result in a report that passes muster with the tax inspectors.

The analogy I use is that if you were to publish a book on architecture, you’d want a publisher on board, but you wouldn’t necessarily want the commissioning editor to write the chapter on computational design. The same holds true for R&D tax credits, because if you want someone to write cogently about architecture, it’s probably best to ask an architect. Of course, it’s still important to have tax and accounting expertise but it should support an architect producing the claim, not the other way around. Our resident architects, Shahd and Lama have studied at some of the UK’s best architecture schools and have practiced at the cutting edge of the industry for years. This experience means they understand the technical detail and nuances of the industry, making communication smooth and ensuring they can ask all the right questions to draw out areas of qualifying expenditure. The result is a robust report that delivers maximum value with minimum hassle.

This unrivalled industry knowledge, alongside the specialist tax expertise of our wider team is a winning formula. Especially when paired with our proprietary thematic analysis and eDiscovery technology, which allows our clients to provide project documentation in bulk, without having to trawl through it for relevant supporting evidence.

The result is a claim that is well-evidenced, robustly prepared and leaves nothing on the table. But don’t just take our word for it, Mark White, Practice Manager at Adam Architecture said this of our approach, “Invennt guided us through their well organised process to deliver the output we needed in a very ecient manner. I would strongly recommend their services.” So, if you need an R&D tax credit claim done properly, ask an architect. Don’t put the cart before the horse.

Next Steps

If you’re already claiming, I encourage you to contact me to explore whether we can improve the process or result. If your practice isn’t claiming, please contact me to book a free exploratory review. Our fee is contingent on the bene昀t you receive, so the only risk from starting the process is a few hours of your team’s time.

+44(0)7948 281571

andy.hastie@invennt.com

Andy Hastie Invennt

Subscription service expands to the new SFA24 agreement

Architect Appointment Subscription Service

In May, we were delighted to launch our ground breaking Architect Appointment subscription service for the PSA22 appointment agreement. This offers a multitude of benefits and ACA Members receive a 20% discount - it’s only £10 per month.

https://acarchitects.co.uk/product/professional-services-agreement-aca-psa22digital-multi-use/

We’ve recently launched SFA24 about which President Patrick Inglis said: “This update of the popular contract between client and architect meets the need for a fair and balanced Standard Form of Agreement which has been updated to comply with current legislation. New for 2024, the agreement is now available in digital format for speed and ease of use.

The SFA24 can be purchased individually with a 25% Member discount –£37.50 plus VAT by emailing the ACA directly at office@acarchitects.co.uk; we’ll need the Site Address to be applied as the watermark and the contract PDF will be emailed once payment has been received.

However, for unlimited use, SFA24 can be purchased via our 12 month subscription service as a Member discounted rate of £15.00 per month (normal price £18 per month):

https://acarchitects.co.uk/product/standard-form-of-agreement-for-theappointment-of-an-architect-aca-sfa24-digital-multi-use/

And as a step further, for increased costs efficiencies and ease, our NEW combination package offers our Members an unlimited supply of both PSA22 and SFA24 appointment agreements at a discounted rate of £20.00 per month - normal price £24.00 per month.

https://acarchitects.co.uk/product/combination-package-aca-sfa24-and-acapca22-digital-multi-use/

s.co.uk/shop/

GALLERY: SASI STUDIO LTD - MATTIA SANTI

ACA excellence in practice

House CN Tower Hamlets

In Gallery we feature the work of a member.

Please send us some of yours!

House CN is a remarkable renovation of a terraced house situated between Hackney and Shoreditch in East London. This project elegantly blends sustainability, craftsmanship, and user-centric design, creating a harmonious and timeless living space. The design juxtaposes natural materials with thoughtfully reused elements, emphasizing environmental responsibility and modern comfort. The home’s existing extension and a tranquil garden, featuring Italian olive trees, provide a harmonious backdrop that seamlessly integrates with the interiors.

Drawing inspiration from the ancient Japanese philosophy of wabi-sabi, the design celebrates simplicity and natural minimalism blending it with elements of Scandinavian hygge, promoting warmth, comfort, and a sense of wellbeing. This elegant transformation was brought to life through collaboration with visionary clients who share a deep appreciation for design and expert craftsmanship. House CN exemplifies a refined balance of aesthetic elegance and contemporary living. – Mattia Santi

Photo credits

©Uliana Grishina

GALLERY: SASI STUDIO LTD - MATTIA SANTI

House DJ Southwark

The House DJ extension is a showcase of bespoke luxury and exceptional craftsmanship. Featuring a custom-designed kitchen and intricately crafted wood wall systems, the project reimagines the living space with a perfect balance of traditional warmth and contemporary functionality. The extension enhances spatial harmony, seamlessly connecting indoor and outdoor areas to create an open, fluid environment.

Meticulously detailed woodwork and modern design elements come together to elevate the home’s aesthetic, ensuring every feature reflects sophistication, elegance, and timeless appeal. –

Photo credit

©Uliana Grishina

Mattia Santi

BSA PRINCIPAL DESIGNER AND PII -

The new regulatory regime for the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA) came into force in England on 1st October last year. Howden’s Laurence Paddock looks at the PII implications of the new role for architects

From 1st October 2023 as per the Building Regulations etc. (Amendment) (England) Regulations 20231, all applicable projects (where there is more than one contractor or it is reasonably foreseeable that more than one contractor will work on the project) must have a Principal Designer with control over the design/building regulations element of the project. This role may be undertaken by an individual, or a firm.

It is important to note that this is a distinct and separate role from the Principal Designer role under the Construction Design & Management Regulations 2015 (CDM), which many firms will already be familiar with. Whilst separate, the same firm may undertake both roles where they have the requisite competencies and capabilities to do so. More detail on the required skill and competency for the role is set out in the Act itself, which provides detailed information on the competencies, duties and notices required. Further to this, firms should also refer to the British Standard Publicly Available Specification (PAS) 86712

Whilst the prior Principal Designer role under CDM was primarily focused on health and safety, the duties introduced under the BSA role will be to coordinate design work so that all reasonable steps are taken to ensure that the design (if it were to be built) would be in accordance with the relevant requirements, such as Building Regulations.

Risk and potential pitfalls

The overriding aim of the act is to reduce safety risks on projects (such as fire or structural risks) through greater regulation, scrutiny, shared responsibility and duties of those engaged on projects which in theory, should provide insurers a degree of comfort. However, there will undoubtedly be a number of new (or enhanced) risks to firms during the lifecycle of a project.

Failure to comply with the new duties could have a number of consequences for both firms and the project, such as:

1. Rejection of the application for building control (creating additional costs or delaying projects) or

the inability to obtain a final completion certificate from the building control body engaged. These additional costs may end up forming part of a civil claim.

2. One point of concern is that there is also the potential for individual duty holders to face fines (which are potentially unlimited) and/or criminal prosecution (please note the comments below on insurance cover for criminal prosecutions) from the Building Safety Regulator. These are not mutually exclusive, a civil claim may exist alongside a parallel criminal prosecution.

Cover under Professional Indemnity Insurance

A key question raised by many firms is whether these new duties and more generally the role of Principal Designer under the BSA is covered under their PII. Policies presently do not contain any exclusions or restrictions specifically around the performance of this role and we would not expect exclusions to be imposed in the future, given it is a statutory role. That said, performance will be subject to the existing policy term and conditions and as with other services being performed by Insured firms, performance of this new role should be disclosed to insurers.

Insurers will no doubt be keeping a keen eye on their exposures to this area and, to a degree, the onus will fall on firms to be able to demonstrate to Insurers that they have the requisite competency to undertake this role and that the risks are being effectively managed. Firms intending to undertake this role should ideally be considering:

1. Whether they fully understand the legislation and its impact on the firm;

2. Whether the processes and procedures currently in place are adequate to correctly perform (and monitor performance) of the new role;

3. Whether there are gaps in competency within the practice and if so, how these can be remedied;

4. Whether they have allocated adequate time and resources to perform the role; and

5. That they are conveying this new role, including its responsibilities and obligations, to the client.

Laurence Paddock is Associate Director –Legal, Technical & Claims, Howden

One important point for firms intending to undertake this role will be how the role is reflected within the appointment contract. As a risk management point, firms should seek to ensure that the responsibilities they are agreeing to contractually do not exceed the role as it is contained in statute, either in breadth of duties or the standard to which firms are to be held to. This point is particularly pertinent when considering bespoke client contracts.

Specific Cover (Criminal Prosecution)

One additional point that firms (and the individuals undertaking the role) should be considering is the potential for criminal prosecutions with the act introducing a number of criminal offences and there being the potential for a prison sentence (not exceeding two years) and/or a fine.

It is not uncommon for the PII policy to contain an extension to cover for the defence of criminal proceedings (subject to conditions), where for example, a prosecution is brought for breach of CDM Regulations 2015. The breadth of cover available under such clauses does vary from policy to policy and with the introduction of the new duties/role under the BSA, firms should consider whether their current policy extends to provide cover for proceedings under the new regime (rather than being specific to just CDM, for example). If the policy does provide cover, firms should also be considering whether the limit of indemnity for the cover is adequate and whether the terms imposed are too restrictive to be of real benefit.

If you have any specific concerns or queries regarding your insurance coverage with this introduction of the new Principal Designer role, please do not hesitate to contact us via the address below. n

Get in touch: howdengroup.com/uk-en/form/contact-us-in-bristol

1 legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2023/911/regulation/6/made 2 bsigroup.com/en-GB/industries/built-environment/

Are you prepared for your professional indemnity insurance renewal?

The FAC-1 Handbook

“FAC-1 is a truly transformative contract that delivers up new relationships throughout the supply chain, whilst introducing shared systems and an effective approach to risk”. — Rebecca Rees, partner Trowers & Hamlins

To purchase visit the ACA shop: https://acarchitects.co.uk/ product/fac-1-handbook/

Spring 2023 saw the publication of ‘The FAC-1 Framework Alliance Contract-: A Handbook’, written by FAC-1 author Professor David Mosey and described by John Welch of Crown Commercial Service as ‘the best friend of everyone, in every sector of the construction industry, who wants to make a real difference.’ FAC-1 has been used to integrate and enhance procurements ranging from £5 million to £30 billion across several jurisdictions, and the new Handbook is designed to provide an introduction for those who are new to this form and a refresher for current users. It includes 30 case studies and 46 practice notes to illustrate how FAC-1 can be used by architects and their teams who are engaged on projects and programmes of works, services or supplies in any sector.

FAC-1 has its origins in research by the King’s College London Centre of Construction Law & Dispute Resolution with the Association of Consultant Architects, exploring with over 100 organisations the potential for a new standard form framework alliance contract to integrate a programme of multiple projects or to integrate the components of one or more complex projects. As a multi-party umbrella, FAC-1 connects any range of consultant appointments and JCT, NEC or PPC forms through collaborative systems which can achieve value improvement, risk management and net zero carbon targets.

The UK ‘Construction Playbook’, published in 2020 and updated in 2022, promotes frameworks as an efficient method to procure public works, goods and services and states that a ‘successful framework contract should be based around principles that align objectives, success measures, targets and incentives so as to enable joint work on improving value and reducing risk’. It recognises FAC-1 as ‘a good example of a standard form framework contract that can achieve many of the ambitions set out in this Playbook.’

A contract that only allocates risks and responsibilities does not recognise the value of contractual connections between architects, engineers and the many specialist contributors to construction and engineering projects. FAC-1 makes these connections, and the Handbook examines notable FAC-1 successes such as:

• Integration of a community of micro-SME architects and engineers to share innovations drawn from community knowledge and experience

• Environmental improvements and integration of architects, engineers, contractors and suppliers using modern methods of construction and BIM on the Ministry of Justice New Prisons programme

• 7 per cent cost savings, 48 per cent time savings, BIM inte-

gration and collaborative risk management by designers and contractors on a new school and civic centre project.

For example, the Handbook describes how FAC-1 supports a drive for net zero carbon by including in its definition of improved value ‘measures intended to reduce carbon emissions, to reduce use of energy and or natural and manmade resources, to improve waste management, to improve employment and training opportunities, and otherwise to protect or improve the condition of the Environment or the well-being of people.’ The Ministry of Justice New Prisons alliance used FAC-1 to ensure that the design for the four new prisons would target BREEAM 2018 Outstanding ratings and to establish routes to net zero carbon, for example by achieving a significant reduction in operational energy consumption from the national grid and an 85% reduction in operational carbon emissions.

The purpose of the Handbook is to guide all parties involved in delivering projects or programmes of works, services or supplies through the FAC-1 contractual relationships and systems. It is designed for use by framework providers, clients, designers, managers, contractors, specialists, operators and legal advisers.

An FAC-1 framework alliance creates the foundations for the integrated working practices such as early supply chain involvement, modern methods of construction and BIM that are essential to the modernisation of the construction industry. The Handbook helps clients, advisers and industry to make clear:

• How an FAC-1 alliance is created, between which alliance members and how additional members can be added

• Why the FAC-1 alliance is created, what are the measures and targets for its success and how it is brought to an end if it does not succeed

• How FAC-1 alliance members are rewarded for their work

• How each stage of the agreed scope of FAC-1 works, services and supplies is authorised, in what stages and among which alliance members

• What FAC-1 alliance members should do together or individually in order to improve economic, environmental and social value, by means of what contributions and by what deadlines

• How the FAC-1 alliance members reach decisions, manage risks and avoid disputes.

The Handbook also tracks how FAC-1 brings to life the 24 recommendations for framework contracts that are set out in ‘Constructing the Gold Standard’, Professor Mosey’s independent review of public sector construction frameworks which was endorsed by government and 49 industry bodies in the 2022 version of the Construction Playbook. !

The Construction Excellence verification scheme is an objective system for recognising and supporting those framework providers and clients who adopt Gold Standard Frameworks, framework contracts and action plans

CONSTRUCTING THE GOLD STANDARD

Gold Standard frameworks

Better framework procurement

‘Constructing the Gold Standard’ sets out an integrated and collaborative approach to framework procurement, contracting and management. It is endorsed by public sector clients and by 50 industry bodies in the September 2022 update of the ‘Construction Playbook’.

In 2021, Professor David Mosey CBE was asked by the Cabinet Office to carry out an Independent Review of Public Sector Construction Frameworks. He consulted 120 organisations and ‘Constructing the Gold Standard’ is the result of his work. It sets out 24 recommendations to help clients and industry identify what questions they should ask when creating and implementing construction frameworks and alliances, what answers they should expect and how they can make informed decisions.

The Constructing Excellence Gold Standard Verification Scheme was launched in November 2023 in partnership with King’s College London. It is an objective system for recognising and supporting framework providers and clients who adopt Gold Standard practices and contracts.

Professor David Mosey CBE FICE, Professor of Law, Centre of Construction and Dispute Resolution

The scheme assesses the claims made by framework providers and by clients who procure their own frameworks, and it provides a measure of quality for clients and industry organisations who use and bid for construction frameworks.

CCS is the first of its public sector peers to achieve Gold Standard Verification procurement

How will public sector clients and supply chains benefit from Crown Commercial Service being the first to achieve Full Verification under 'Constructing the Gold Standard'? Here are 10 examples:

1. The 24 Gold Standard recommendations and case studies help all public sector clients and their supply chains to improve value and to reduce risks.

2. The Gold Standard describes contractual systems that convert Net Zero objectives into agreed actions and timetables.

3. The Gold Standard recommendations are integrated with building safety guidance that is designed to avoid another Grenfell Tower disaster.

4. Pipelines of work under Gold Standard frameworks are linked to contractual systems for sharing information to avoid the 'Groundhog Day' of lost learning.

5. Gold Standard framework alliance contracts integrate different commercial interests through practical systems that avoid the collaborative 'Bermuda Triangle' of idealistic debate, cynical criticism and unrealised good intentions.

6. The Gold Standard supports a holistic approach to frameworks and call-offs through the 'Four I's' of intention, information, integration and incentivisation.

7. Proportionate and consistent Gold Standard evaluation of framework and call-off proposals avoids the 'race to the bottom' of uninformed low-ball prices.

8. Gold Standard early supply chain involvement and prompt payment ensure maximum tier 1, 2, 3 supply chain contributions to innovation and social value.

9. Gold Standard framework alliance contracts ensure joint risk management through strategic systems for early warning and dispute avoidance.

10. The Gold Standard recommendations are endorsed by Cabinet Office and by the 50 industry bodies who signed the 'Construction Playbook'.

10. The Gold Standard Recommendations are endorsed by Cabinet Office and by the 50 industry bodies who signed the Construction Playbook

“I’m delighted that CCS’s Construction frameworks have achieved Gold Standard status. Our frameworks are designed to facilitate a real shift change in how construction requirements are procured, increasing supply chain collaboration, boosting innovation, supporting carbon net zero targets, and focusing just as strongly on building safety. This accreditation demonstrates how we’re continuously improving our service for customers. It isn’t just about saving them time and money. It’s about maximising their estates to build a better future for the communities they serve.” John Welch FRICS, Commercial Director at Crown Commercial Service.

Gold Standard verification is a robust process led by an Independent Verifier and supported by a Constructing Excellence Task Group. Other applicants are expected to achieve Full Verification in the near future.

“The Gold Standard features of the Crown Commercial Service frameworks and alliances, supported by their innovative contracts, have helped clients such as Ministry of Justice and Defence Infrastructure Organisation to achieve impressive efficiencies, innovations and net zero commitments. Their Gold Standard practices and contracts have also ensured new business opportunities and fair treatment for tier 1 and tier 2 supply chain members.” Professor David Mosey CBE, King's College London.

Following on from CCS, Places for People Procurement Hub, SCAPE, CHIC and LHC Procurement Group have now received full Gold Standard Verification. With over 2000 public sector frameworks to choose from, the Constructing Excellence Gold Standard Task Group and its Independent Verifiers help clients and industry to make an informed choice by reference to the 24 Gold Standard recommendations and the evidence of collaborative systems that achieve improved quality, safety, cost effectiveness, social value and net zero. n

Jane Goddard, deputy CEO and chief marketing officer at BRE, said: “Better procurement is crucial to enable the construction supply chain to effectively deliver a sustainable built environment and meet our climate goals.“It’s great to see Crown Commercial Service demonstrating its leadership in this space through the independent Constructing Excellence scheme and driving best practice across the procuring departments. We look forward to verifying many more framework providers through the scheme in the coming months.” !

'Constructing the Gold Standard' can be accessed at https://lnkd.in/eAAJrnyv

As published by Kings College London 12th August 2024

Professor David Mosey, CBE, Centre of Construction Law, King’s College London

Here’s the text of the ACA’s submission to ARB in response to their consultation

ARB: proposed new Code of Conduct

The ACA is a professional body for architect principals and represents architects working in private practice as well as promoting excellence in practice. We have nearly 500 architect principal members across the full range of practice sizes and therefore represent a substantial proportion of architects.

We have significant concerns about the new code of conduct. In particular the repeated use of broad and ill-defined language in many standards as well as un-caveated absolute terms such as “must”, will potentially expose architects to unwarranted complaints and sanctions. We therefore do not think that many of the standards are reasonable as currently worded. Our specific comments on each standards are set out below.

Guidance on some of these issues is welcomed, but quite a few are just unnecessary duplication of other already existing legislation that will potentially lead to confusion and greater exposure to risk for architects. This is overreach by ARB and the extent of guidance should be substantially reduced from that proposed.

Standard 1 - Honesty and integrity

1.1 Act impartially and exercise professional judgment based on the evidence available

Agree

1.2 Promote their services responsibly and accurately.

Agree.

1.3 Declare and manage any conflicts of interest appropriately.

Agree.

1.4 Are open and honest about any payments or inducements offered or received.

Agree

1.5 Report to ARB any instance where their own professionalism may be called into question, or any apparent breach of this Code by another architect.

Disagree. This requires architects to second guess whether a client might complain, which is unreasonable. The requirement to report other architects for even minor infringements places an unreasonable burden on architects. In particular junior architects maybe be placed in an impossible position by this requirement.

1.6 Co-operate with any formal inquiries or ARB investigations.

Disagree. It is unreasonable to require blanket co-operation with all enquires where there might be vexatious complaints.

Standard 2 - Public interest

The wording of the standard is highly problematic. “Must” is an absolute standard and the standard is worded in a way that is far too broad and puts far too much responsibility on architects. The standard states that architects must prioritise the public interest over everything else.- potentially including making a decent living or the interests of their client. The absolute requirement to prevent harm to others is unreasonable and in combination with other standards such as 2.1 leaves architects exposed to vexatious complaints and conflicts of interest with their client. Overall this standard as worded is unreasonable.

2.1 Use their best endeavours to enhance the environment in which we live.

Disagree. This is far too broad and “best endeavours” is far too absolute and will invite potentially vexatious complaints by clients or environmental activists. This standard is therefore unreasonable. There is no standard of reasonableness in line with other professional obligations.

2.2 Protect the health and safety of those who construct, maintain and use buildings and places.

Disagree. This is too broad and absolute given the role that architects have in constructing buildings. This is also covered by other legislation and therefore unnecessary. There is no standard of reasonableness in line with other professional obligations.

2.3 Challenge others where their actions may put people at risk, and report them to an appropriate authority when those risks are not adequately managed.

Disagree. This is already covered by 2.2 and by other legislation. Broad and absolute wording with no test of reasonableness may leave architects exposed to vexatious complaints.

2.4 Advise clients of their legal responsibilities and withdraw from any commission which is unlawful or requires them to act contrary to these Standards.

Disagree. Architects are not lawyers and not qualified to give legal advice. This standard is unreasonable as worded. In theory as worded and in combination with the current wording of 2.1 this could require architects to withdraw from projects where a client wanted a gas boiler or did not want to add PVs. This stan-

ARB CODE OF CONDUCT

ACA excellence in practice

dard is unreasonable as worded.

3.1 Acknowledge and work within the limits of their competence, expertise and experience.

Agree.

3.2 Adopt a reflective approach to their work by identifying individual learning needs, ensuring they are up to date with current standards and best practice.

Disagree. A reasonable requirement would be to make sure architects are up to date with current standards by carrying out CPD. Anything wording beyond this is unnecessary and unreasonable. “Best practice” is too broad.

3.3 Seek and reflect on feedback from others, so they can apply what they have learned to future work.

Disagree. This is unnecessary and unduly onerous. It would be unreasonable for an architect to be sanctioned for failing to invite feedback from all “others”.

3.4 Appoint only competent people to carry out work.

Disagree. What is meant by “appoint” or “work? This potentially carries too much liability for architects and is unreasonable as worded.

3.5 Provide appropriate supervision and sufficient resources to people they appoint to carry out work.

Disagree. What is meant by “appoint"? This potentially carries too much liability.

3.6 Encourage the professional development of those for whom they are responsible.

Disagree. What is meant by “responsible”? This is not clearly worded and therefore potentially carries too much liability.

3.7 Maintain their knowledge and understanding of guidance issued by ARB in support of these Standards.

Disagree. Is this really covered by the Architects Act?

4.1 Provide written terms of engagement which are understood by their client before commencing work.

Agree.

4.2 Plan, monitor and manage their work in a timely manner.

Agree.

4.3 Have sufficient resources and capacity to provide their services effectively.

Agree.

4.4 Establish quality assurance processes to ensure projects are regularly monitored and reviewed.

Disagree. Wording is too absolute with no standard of reasonableness in line with other professional obligations.

4.5 Maintain proper records of their work and decisions.

Agree.

4.6 Protect the confidentiality and security of information for which they are responsible.

Disagree. This is already covered by national legislation and there is no need for duplication.

4.7 Ensure their liabilities are covered by adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance.

Disagree. It should be up to the individual person or firm to make these decisions.

4.8 Deal with disputes or complaints promptly and professionally. Agree but needs to be clearly defined.

4.9 Manage their finances properly.

Agree.

5.1 Communicate professionally and in a way that will be understood by their audience.

Agree but needs to be clearly defined.

5.2 Understand and confirm their clients’ requirements before committing to work.

Agree.

5.3 Explain their role, and manage the expectations of others as to what might be achieved.

Agree.

5.4 Communicate any issues that may impact the cost, time or quality of a project in a timely manner.

Disagree. Wording is too absolute with no standard of reasonableness in line with other professional obligations.

5.5 Collaborate proactively with other professionals to achieve positive outcomes.

Agree with the sentiment but what if a "positive outcome" is not achievable under any circumstances. This needs rewording.

6.1 Are polite and considerate.

Disagree. This is subjective.

6.2 Display a committed approach to equity, diversity and inclusion, including in their approach to designing environments and in their relationships with colleagues, employees, clients and communities.

Disagree. Agree with the sentiment, but the word “committed’ is too absolute and broad and invites potentially vexatious complaints. This is already covered by national legislation so only needs aspirational wording.

6.3 Contribute to a positive and inclusive working environment.

No problem with this, but is this really necessary in the Code? This is covered by other legislation already.

6.4 Maintain and respect professional and personal boundaries. No problem with this, but is this really necessary in the Code? This is covered by other legislation already. n

The

Conservation, Heritage, Restoration & Building Journal. Celebrating our 10th anniversary.

Our Journal is distributed on a controlled circulation and subscription basis quarterly to key decision makers in organisations in the world of Conservation, Heritage and Ecclesiastical matters. Conservation & Heritage Journal keeps abreast of what's happening in this important sector of our culture with the latest news and a wide range of informative features written by well respected individuals and organisations in their specialised field of expertise.

With a readership of over 22,000 and growing to a highly targeted audience, Conservation & Heritage Journal is an A4 perfect bound full colour journal published quarterly, this makes it a unique vehicle to advertise specialist skills, products and services so essential to this sector.

Please email for a complimentary copy.

Our website has all our latest news and articles, it also has a 'Search' function where you can search for tradesman, craftsmen and suppliers. In this search you can obtain contact details, examples of work and company history.

New small and simple works appointment agreement out now!

The ACA Professional Services Agreement PSA22 is the refreshed contract for small and domestic works by The Association of Consultant Architects and drafted in collaboration with HCR Hewitsons. With many standard form building related agreements becoming ever more lengthy and complex, the ACA PSA22 seeks in its concise format to provide a fair basis for an agreement between a client and an Architect when it comes to building projects of a simple nature. The Agreement is suitable for both Consumer and Commercial entity Clients.

This contract provides:-

1. An agenda for parties to agree on the core terms of any such arrangement including to clarify the responsibilities of both parties particularly the scope of services to be undertaken

2. The arrangements for managing the Architect’s fees and expenses

3. How the contract can be brought to an end and ultimately how disputes are to be managed.

The cost is £36.00 plus VAT and can be purchased here:https://acarchitects.co.uk/product/professional-servicesagreement-aca-psa22-digital-multi-use/ And ACA Members are entitled to an exclusive 25% discount; £27.00 plus VAT by emailing office@acarchitects.co.uk

Upon receipt of your ACA PSA22 contract order and payment, the ACA will contact you to request the ‘Site Address’ for inclusion within the Agreement and this will be used to generate your PDF ACA PSA22 contract. The ACA PSA22 contract will be a locked, watermarked PDF, the watermark being the ‘Site Address’ and you will not be able to modify this; as per the How To Use Guide PDF which you will also receive upon order confirmation, the only digitally modifiable elements are in Section 3.

ISB Number

978-1-8382857-3-9

ACA CPD EVENTS

ACA CPD events

Events - 2025 March

CULS/LP&DF Annual Planning Update

25th March at Dentons, London Book through www.culandsoc.com

ACA Principal Designer BSA Role Soapbox

Date to be confirmed

May

UK Construction Week, London

7th to 9th May London Excel

ACA Spring Networking Drinks

Date to be confirmed

July

ACA Away Day Wednesday 2nd July

ACA Summer Networking Drinks

Date to be confirmed

The ACA office will closed from Tuesday 24th December through to Thursday 2nd January 2025.

Please keep an eye out for emails from the ACA Office inviting you to further webinars and other events

ACA Forms of Appointment

The ACA publishes two architectural appointments. The highly successful SFA 2012 – Standard Form of Agreement for the Appointment of an Architect – which has now been refreshed and launched as SFA24 available only in digital format at £50 plus VAT. Secondly, our updated contract of architectural appointment the PSA22 which is for small and domestic works. Available only in a digital format £36 plus VAT, however, pricing includes cover copies for both parts of the agreement.

Both contracts offer a 25% member discount by emailing office@acarchitects.co.uk and are now available in unlimited copies on subscription either individually or in our combination package; see article in this ACANews.

Download the worked example of SFA 2012 edition (with updates) as a ‘taster’ from here: https://tinyurl.com/ 1mt7tuf6

ACA PUBLICATIONS

GO TO: https://acarchitects.co.uk/shop/ and http://allianceforms.co.uk

The ACA publishes a number of key documents used extensively by the building professions and within the industry. They are divided into the general sections below for clarity.

The ACA recommends the following as best practice guidance: incorporation of terms by reference

1. Ensure you complete and sign an appropriate and current Standard Form of Agreement / Contract at the outset. This should prevent misunderstandings on what has been agreed.

2. Agree the scope of services within the Agreement / Contract with the Client. Clarify what is included and the cost. This should avoid the risk of unlimited liability

3. Consider the effect of any proposed amendments to the Standard Form

ACA Suite of Partnering Contracts, PPC2000, TPC2005 and SPC2000 and related Guidance

The current publications are:

PPC2000 (Amended 2013) – ACA Standard Form of Contract for Project Partnering

TPC2005 (Amended 2008) – ACA Standard Form of Contract for Term Partnering

SPC2000 (Amended 2008) – ACA Standard Form of Specialist Contract for Project Partnering

SPC2000 Short From (Issued 2010) – ACA Standard Form of Specialist Contract for Project Partnering

STPC2005 (Issued 2010) – ACA Standard Form of Specialist Contract for Term Partnering Guide to ACA Project Partnering Contracts

PPC2000 and SPC2000

Guide to ACA Term Partnering Contracts

TPC2005 and STPC2005

Introduction to Pricing Under PPC2000

Introduction to Pricing Under TPC2005

PPC(S) – Scottish Supplement to PPC2000

If you are starting a new building project, you should use the latest versions of each contract which contain incorporated amendments.

There is a PPC2000 dedicated website at www.ppc2000.co.uk for further information on ACA/ACE suite of partnering contracts. To learn more about the range of projects that have been procured using PPC2000 and TPC2005 you can download the free publication which features 28 case studies: 10 Years of PPC2000

ACA Suite of Alliance Contracts

FAC-1 and TAC-1

and ensure you take appropriate legal advice. Avoid jeopardising good working relationships.

4. Ensure all terms of any agreement / contract are clearly set out and that none are “incorporated by reference” as these will not appear within what you sign. If necessary ensure terms of agreement are signed separately. Don’t waste time and avoid costly disputes

The entire publications catalogue is available to view on the PPublications Shop page at https://acarchitects.co.uk/shop/with a short description of each, costs and their ISBN numbers.

The current publications are:

FAC-1 - Framework Alliance Contract

TAC-1 – Term Alliance Contract

Visit the dedicated website at www.allianceforms.co.uk for further information and detailed guidance.

ACA Forms of Architectural Appointment

The ACA publishes two architectural appointments.

The highly successful SFA 2012 - Standard Form of Agreement for the Appointment of an Architect which has now been refreshed and launched as SFA24. Available only in digital format at £50 plus VAT.’

Secondly, our updated contract of architectural appointment; the PSA22 which is for small and domestic works. Available only in a digital format £36 plus VAT, however, pricing includes cover copies for both parts of the agreement. Both contracts offer a 25% member discount by emailing office@acarchitects.co.uk and are now available in unlimited copies on subscription either individually or in our combination package; see article in this ACANews.

A full sample ‘worked’ copy of the ACA SFA 2008 edition (with updates) appointment document is available to view free on the Taster pages.

Download the worked example from here: https://tinyurl.com/ 1mt7tuf6

Tasters

More complete descriptions and some ‘Tasters’ of the main ACA documents may be viewed on the ‘Tasters’ pages. Order documents via the website on the Order Form at https://acarchitects.co.uk/shop/

If you are ordering more than five copies of any publications, or are ordering from overseas, please contact us at office@acarchitects.co.uk to arrange for a bespoke shipping quote and discounted costs on the publications.

Please see our terms and conditions of trading ACA Publication purchase T & Cs n

Thomas Futcher - 105 West Architects Ltd

Laura McLaughlin- RM Architects Ltd (T/A RM_A)

Nick Farnell - NFA Architects Ltd

Federico Schilling - Flair Studio

Richard Ward - Pentargon Architecture

John Moore - Karakusevic Carson Architects

Sam Nolan - North Devon Architects Ltd

Jonathan Capek - Scorer Hawkins Architect

Stephen Osborne - Wigan Council

Hassan Ali - Kiani Architects

Sarah Burley - pencil and ink ltd

Mark Hatter - Hatterwan Architects

Adrian W Rowlands-

PenseiriAWRA:AURAarchitectsUK

Lesley Bell - Gallus Studio

Eleanor Figueiredo - N Family Club

Welcome to new members ACA is growing

Sarah Earney - Sarah Earney Architecture & Conservation

Keri Barr - Keri Barr Architects

Allison Tatterton - Studio AT

Charles Wood - Golden Triangle Architects

Jaimie Shorten - Barker Shorten Architects LLP

Mark Slater - WWA

Chris Bowen - ScorerHawkins Architects

John Kellett - KR.eativ: Architects Ltd

Julian Cordoba Saborido - HWO Architects

In order for the ACA to have more of an effective voice and representation when providing Government consultations and lobbying parliament, we are always looking for new members.

Membership is FREE so do spread the word to colleagues. and be sure to follow us on (NEW!): ACA@groups.io and

LinkedIn The Association of Consultant Architects

SPECIAL! ACANews NEW YEAR 2025

ACA President Patrick Inglis on a productive year

FROM THE PRESIDENT

From the President

Planning Reform

Principal Designer

New ARB Code of Conduct

New Forms of Appointment

ACAPAG PLANNING REPORT

ACA excellence in practice

Old Andy’s Almanac for 2025

2nd

THE FRAMEWORK ALLIANCE CONTRACT

What is the FAC-1 framework alliance contract?

THE FRAMEWORK ALLIANCE CONTRACT

ACA excellence in practice

How does FAC-1 work?

What is the structure of FAC-1?

LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE RTPI

ACA PLANNING

Grenfell exposed the fatal flaws of design & build contracts

Annual Planning Update

Principal Designer update

Building Regulations Principal Designer Competence Statement

A Guide to Your Role and Responsibilities as a Domestic Client

What is your Role as a Client?

What is a Principal Designer?

For architects, by architects

Book a Consultation

COUNCIL AND OFFICERS

Council Members

Rethinking sustainable growth for UK architecture practices

Taking Control of Growth

BUSINESS SUPPORT FOR MEMBERS

SUPPORT FOR MEMBERS

R&D tax relief for R&D tax relief for

Is your practice putting the cart before the horse?

Next Steps

Subscription service expands to the new SFA24 agreement

Architect Appointment Subscription Service

GALLERY: SASI STUDIO LTD - MATTIA SANTI

GALLERY: SASI STUDIO LTD - MATTIA SANTI

House DJ Southwark

BSA PRINCIPAL DESIGNER AND PII -

Risk and potential pitfalls

Cover under Professional Indemnity Insurance

Specific Cover (Criminal Prosecution)

The FAC-1 Handbook

CONSTRUCTING THE GOLD STANDARD

CONSTRUCTING THE GOLD STANDARD

Gold Standard frameworks

Better framework procurement

ARB: proposed new Code of Conduct

Standard 1 - Honesty and integrity

Standard 2 - Public interest

ARB CODE OF CONDUCT

ACA excellence in practice

The

New small and simple works appointment agreement out now!

ACA CPD EVENTS

ACA CPD events

ACA Forms of Appointment

ACA PUBLICATIONS

FAC-1 and TAC-1

Other building related Contracts and documents

Tasters

Welcome to new members ACA is growing