Architect's fees

[abbeylands]

Just had plans done for our extension - double storey and seperate garage about 100sq m without the garage Have put the costs next to your for comparison

a) measured survey of existing building/land (£720), 500
(b) prelim consultations (£480), in with above
(c) planning application drawings (£480), 500
(d) Building Regs application and construction drawings (£960), 300

Toptal original estimate from the architect was £1,200 but I did make some changes to the initial plans

Considerably less and living in the South West not a cheap area. Architect has overseen all elements of the planning process and is now drawing building regs plans prior to obtaining quotes.

 

[benyboy]

If an architect tells you that he is not registered, it is likely that he is not be an architect at all, but simply a plans drawer. 'Architect' is a legally protected term, and all architects must be registered with the ARB.

 

[scotswayhay]

If an architect tells you that he is not registered, it is likely that he is not be an architect at all, but simply a plans drawer. 'Architect' is a legally protected term, and all architects must be registered with the ARB.

I'm a registered architect living in Scotland, own practice, and regularly quote fees that work out at about £25 p/h before tax, PI insurance, overheads etc.

Even when I quote this low rate (compared to apparently 'skilled' tradesmen who charge £150 a day) clients still say it's too dear and go with the unqualified, uninsured mickey mouse plan drawer who does it for £500 quid! The end result - they come back to me with all their problems with planning, building warrant, ugly design that doesn't work etc.

I'm sorting out 3 jobs for people who went with the 'cheap' technician who badly advised them - but they have no recourse as these plan drawers don't have insurance! End result - nightmare, heartache and expense!

Do yourselfs a favour - find an architect you like - interview several. Don't do anything until you receive a written fee quote - discuss it with the architect. Then and only then, do you sign up. You wouldn't buy a car without signing a bit of paper so don't extend your house until you sign a bit of paper - if the 'architect' won't put their name to a written agreement then they either aren't an architect or they're avoiding the tax man.

You pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you're spending £20000 - £50000 on an extension, then get the drawings right! 10% of the build cost to oversee the project from start to finish is nothing!

Remember doctors can bury their mistakes - architects have to plant trees!

 

[noseall]

I am an Architect in Edinburgh and I publish my fees on my website. http://www.capitala.co.uk/architects-fees.html
I find that potential clients find this very helpful and I have won several commissions as a result.

Top man!

A pro' with transparency - i like it.

Your secret is out now!

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I am an Architect in Edinburgh and I publish my fees on my website. http://www.capitala.co.uk/architects-fees.html
I find that potential clients find this very helpful and I have won several commissions as a result.

They're only a crude guide though aren't they, every fee for every job is different, there are so many variants when quoting for a job having a a set percentage is almost irrelevant.

 

[noseall]

They're only a crude guide though aren't they, every fee for every job is different, there are so many variants when quoting for a job having a a set percentage is almost irrelevant.

I knew it was too good to be true.

 

[corsh]

Hello all
We've just been given a quote/estimate from a RIBA architect for c£4k (estimated build cost £25k) for a dormer loft conversion. This is at a discounted hourly rate. He has done a preliminary feasibility drawing at no charge, and the rest of the costs are broken down into
(a) measured survey of existing building/land (£720),
(b) prelim consultations (£480),
(c) planning application drawings (£480),
(d) Building Regs application and construction drawings (£960),
(e) schedule of works/tendering (£480), and
(f) site admin, construction stage (£960).
Would you agree these costs were acceptable?
We could go without (e) and (f), and aren't sure what (a) entails. We only need a 'basic' two bedroom plus shower/wc conversion, and obviously don't want to pay for any more than is necessary. Other estimates we've had, from people recommended by builders, have come in much much lower (!), and these are for planning and building regs drawings/applications.
He's been really helpful, etc, but are we paying over the odds for him being with RIBA, and would we taking any risks going for an architectural technician or non-RICS registered chartered surveyor for basic drawings?
We're in Greater London.
Thanks in advance

It sounds at the right fee scale about 18 percent that is the recommended for the works for an architect on a small job as there is still as much work as if the project is 100k - it always causes concern when we outline costs but we do a heck of a lot of work for it. A cheaper service is not going to give you the professional service you may want. I am sure you can try to barter the fees down but we do not make much profit out of small jobs.

 

[geraint]

If an architect tells you that he is not registered, it is likely that he is not be an architect at all, but simply a plans drawer. 'Architect' is a legally protected term, and all architects must be registered with the ARB.

what a load of gonadds..... still.. a sweaty....

 

[geraint]

Hello all
We've just been given a quote/estimate from a RIBA architect for c£4k (estimated build cost £25k) for a dormer loft conversion. This is at a discounted hourly rate. He has done a preliminary feasibility drawing at no charge, and the rest of the costs are broken down into
(a) measured survey of existing building/land (£720),
(b) prelim consultations (£480),
(c) planning application drawings (£480),
(d) Building Regs application and construction drawings (£960),
(e) schedule of works/tendering (£480), and
(f) site admin, construction stage (£960).
Would you agree these costs were acceptable?
We could go without (e) and (f), and aren't sure what (a) entails. We only need a 'basic' two bedroom plus shower/wc conversion, and obviously don't want to pay for any more than is necessary. Other estimates we've had, from people recommended by builders, have come in much much lower (!), and these are for planning and building regs drawings/applications.
He's been really helpful, etc, but are we paying over the odds for him being with RIBA, and would we taking any risks going for an architectural technician or non-RICS registered chartered surveyor for basic drawings?
We're in Greater London.
Thanks in advance

It sounds at the right fee scale about 18 percent that is the recommended for the works for an architect on a small job as there is still as much work as if the project is 100k - it always causes concern when we outline costs but we do a heck of a lot of work for it. A cheaper service is not going to give you the professional service you may want. I am sure you can try to barter the fees down but we do not make much profit out of small jobs.

and i thought the only shoouey fee. was in crossroads many years ago...or was it mac..... bloody jocks....

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

If an architect tells you that he is not registered, it is likely that he is not be an architect at all, but simply a plans drawer. 'Architect' is a legally protected term, and all architects must be registered with the ARB.

what a load of gonadds..... still.. a sweaty....

Oh geraint, wrong again http://www.arb.org.uk/news_and_info...do_to_regulate_use_of_the_title_architect.php

 

[tcb1973]

Hi,

We're currently having drawings done by an Architectural technician job consiting of:
initial conult visit
photos/sketches and measuring the house (everywhere
full plans for planing permission
initial sketches for party wall act and detailed estimates from builder
help with designing kitchen
dealing with planning control and builder as and when required
on tap for questions/help etc

£700 plus VAT

We are very happy with that - job is only small though probably 7m2

SAm

 

[geraint]

If an architect tells you that he is not registered, it is likely that he is not be an architect at all, but simply a plans drawer. 'Architect' is a legally protected term, and all architects must be registered with the ARB.

what a load of gonadds..... still.. a sweaty....

Oh geraint, wrong again http://www.arb.org.uk/news_and_info...gulate_use_of_the_title_architect.php[/QUOTE]

is that the new ariba....

 

[^woody^]

Hi,

We're currently having drawings done by an Architectural technician
£700 plus VAT

job is only small though probably 7m2

What about building regulations?

Its still about £200 too much for a tiny 7m2 extension, IMO

 

[tcb1973]

Yeah it is a little top heavy I accept that - but important to us also is that we click with the people we employ and that they demonstrate the 'people skills' that are condusive to a good working relationship.

The practise comes highly recommended and seperate builders have told us they like working from these guys plans becasue there is a lot of extra info as well as the drawings to aid the builder.

Maybe we could have found it cheaper elsewhere - but the above for me is worth paying a little bit extra and feeling confident and supported by a strong team in a potentially stressful situation. Seen too many people get sh*fted by opting for the cheapest route

We will have to pay buidling regs on top of that - total of £310 in two installments

not cheap but if you pay peanuts etc

 

[andysuter]

Sorry for raising an old post but it popped up while i was googling a similar subject.

I must say that im shocked at some of the 'opinions' of the Architects that have posted in this tread but sorry to say, they are not unique as i have encountered the same outdated attitude while in practise.

As an Architectural technician whose been in the industry 22 years i can safely say that for things like a house extension, I would choose a Technician without question.

As mentioned an architects 'skill' is design. Thats why they spend 8 years learning how to cut shapes out of coloured paper (seriously, its on the course at Huddersfield Uni). Most come out of Uni with little or no knowledge of actual real world construction industry practices. To be fair this also applies to Technicians who study the full time degree in Technology.

Most 'old school' technicians left school at 16 or 18 and went straight into and Architects practise. Learning how to build from day one, while studying day release at college. Most Technicians trained this way are running multi million pounds projects by the age of 25, just when Architects start popping out of Uni. Who would you rather trust with your 30k?

Im being a little pedantic here, as i know it will get a reaction, but I do feel techncians are unfarily seen as 'cad monkeys' when in fact its quite the opposite. They are trained in the technology of a building and traditionally, the architect would 'design' the building then hand over to the technican to create the builders drawings and make it work into a buildable building. More recently those lines have become blurred and many technicans are now involved in design, as architects are involved in the detailing. The two compliment each other, not opose each other.

Its also outdated and unifomed to say that a technician doesnt need insurance. The CIAT chartered institue or Technicians requires PI insurance for practising technicans, (not those working for practises), which is the same as ARB registered architects.

For simple things like a basic extension a technican will be fine, a good one wont be cheaper than an architect, but will produce a reasonable design along with a very detailed and workable set of construction drawings.

In terms of fees, I do agree with a lot of posts on this forum. Clients are willing to hand over 30K to a builder, yet get a nosebuild when quoted £1200 to actually design the thing!. That can work out at £25 an hour yet when the local car mechanic or plumber quotes £50 an hour its seen as reasonable. As said by another poster, time up front ironing out the details could save you multiple times the fee in extras or abortive costs later on.

I now run my own 'architectural technicans' practise.