A recap of the ACA President's Autumn update

1 Introducing the Association of Consultant Architects
2 Collaborative Contracts, BSR Reforms and ACA Council Elections
3 Related articles on Designing Buildings

[edit] Introducing the Association of Consultant Architects

The Association of Consultant Architects (ACA) is the national professional body representing architects in private practice. It was founded in 1973 by former presidents of the RIBA at a time when there was no organisation dedicated specifically to the interests of private practitioners. It is governed by a council of practising architects elected democratically by and from the voting membership. The council is chaired by the President.

Patrick Inglis became President of ACA in early 2025, following on from Andrew Catto who remains an active member of the ACA Council as the immediate past president. For more information about ACA visit https://acarchitects.co.uk/.

The principal purpose of the ACA is to represent and support architects in their resolve to provide excellence in practice. The Association lobbies and consults with Government and major industry bodies, arranges events and provides other services in support of this goal.

The ACA’s main objectives are:

To encourage excellence in the quality of service provided by ACA members to clients.
To represent private practice architects, their interests and aims. Supporting them on issues pertinent to architectural practice and the field as a whole.

The ACA is not a regulatory body. It offers practising architects an independent voice within the construction industry and maintains close contact with the press, government and professional and trade bodies. It promotes the value of architects, the importance of their work and the ways the everyday life of the public is impacted by architecture.

Membership is open to registered architects practising on their own account, either alone or in partnership or as a director of a company whose business consists wholly or mainly of an architects’ practice or an allied field. Members may adopt the suffix ‘ACArch’.

Membership is practice based. Registered architects working as principals in private practice are eligible to become full voting members. Non voting membership is open to architects employed in practices whose principals are not ACA members, students of architecture and retired architects. Architects who choose to become ACA members can join FREE simply by signing up at http://www.acarchitects.co.uk

The ACA supports members by providing information to help with practice issues such as professional indemnity insurance, health and safety, legal questions and environmental obligations. The work of members is promoted in email newsletters, website updates, social media posts, exhibitions and conferences.

The ACA Principal Designer register provides a platform for architects in private practice to demonstrate their competence as Principal Designers under Building Regulations established by the Building Safety Act. It is an associate member of the CIC (Construction Industry Council) and publishes a range of contracts: for more information see article Association of Consultant Architects ACA.

Below is the current President, Patrick Inglis' update for the ACA newsletter published in Autumn, 2025.

[edit] Collaborative Contracts, BSR Reforms and ACA Council Elections

[edit] Building Safety Act

It is two years since the fundamental changes to the Building Control regime brought about by the Building Safety Act came into force, so now is a moment to review how the changes are playing out.

Overall the changes are well intentioned and welcome. In particular the creation of the Principal Designer and other roles has brought clarity to who is responsible for Building Regulations compliance and has provided architects with a mechanism to regain some lost control over projects as well as charge additional fees.

However, there are significant issues that are negatively impacting the construction industry that risk undermining the new rules or are causing significant delays and needlessly increasing costs.

The horrific delays to HRB projects caused by the backlog in processing GW2 applications is well documented, but other issues have not received the same degree of prominence, but are also highly concerning.

A key issue is that the new regulations create fundamental problems for design and build contracts. The regulations state that the client must appoint "a designer with control over the design work as the Principal Designer*. This is self-evidently needs to be the lead designer, which on most construction projects will be the architect, and this appointment needs to be direct with the client.

However, if an architect is employed by the contractor under a D&B contract, there is clearly a conflict of interest if you are also acting as Principal Designer for the client. In this situation it is really the contractor, who should act as PD, but many are unwilling or unqualified to take on the role.

As a result the void is too often being filled by 3rd party consultants offering to take on the role. While clearly against the fundamental principles behind the regulations that the role is carried out by someone in control of the design and HSE guidance explicitly stating that PDs should not be a 3rd party with no influence over design decisions, poor drafting has created a loophole that allows the CDM Principal Designer to act as BRPD.

Since they aren't acting as lead designer, these consultants are often able to undercut architects, who have to carry much more onerous PIl. It is also hard to believe that they can actually be doing the job properly given their lack of control over the design.

Worryingly a recent list of GW2 applications featured a significant proportion of these firs as acting as PD on HRB projects. This is very concerning and if allowed to continue unchecked will completely undermine a key plank of the regulations and risk turning compliance back into a tick-box exercise. Architects acting as lead designer should clearly be the Principal Designer and the regulations should be amended to make this explicit as a matter of urgency.

Another challenge that is not getting much coverage is all the small projects in HRBs, such as flat refurbs. These are suffering significant delays and escalating costs to the point that I would recommend that clients do not buy flats in HRBs unless they intend never to do any work to them.

A third area that I would highlight for concern is all the projects that do not involve an architect at all, such as loft conversions or small extensions. It seems highly likely that many builders operating in this sector are not qualified to act as Principal Designer and will therefore either illegally sign off designs or as likely leave homeowners to have to sign off compliance leaving them in a much worse position that before the regulations came in. This cannot possibly have been the intension and 1 fear that we are only going to find out about the scale of these problems when lots of projects start going wrong and owners start looking for someone to blame only to find that they have taken on design responsibility by mistake.

By now members will have had considerable experience of the new rules, so please share your experiences so that we can help members deal with the inevitable problems and dilemmas that will arise as the rules bed in. In the meantime, you should be acting as Principal Designer so embrace it and charge for it!

[edit] Bats out of Hell

As the promised upturn in construction activity continues to be frustratingly elusive, I wanted to share some thoughts on the implementation of BNG that is added to the woe of trying to actually get anything built in this country.

BNG came in some 18 months ago and in effect it created protection of function for ecologists (lucky them!), who now need to get involved in practically all development schemes including very small ones that they would never have been near previously.

While the BNG regulations in themselves are adding cost, complexity and delay, it seems that an unintended serious side effect is that ecologist don't seem to be able to attend a site without finding potential bat roosts, which in turn then entail very expensive additional surveys - which by co-incidence also need to be carried out by ecologists.

Apart from the quite frankly outrageous survey costs - which are presumed to be due to a shortage of ecologists - this has the potential to tum into a serious problem as bat surveys can only be carried out 5 months of the year and some sites need up to 3 surveys 3 weeks apart.

The BNG regulations are well meaning and are trying to address an important problem and bats quite rightly need protecting, but as an example, my practice has already had two housing projects delayed by a year due to this and unless something changes quickly I fear we are in danger of only being able to submit planning applications for less than half the year.

The government is consulting on amending the regulations so hopefully change is on its way, but due to the need for primary legislation it will be at least two years before anything improves. So in the meantime I suggest architects address any bat surveys at the beginning of project to try and mitigate any potential delays.

[edit] ACA Council Elections

At the ACA AGM three new members of council were elected and I am delighted to welcome Phil Waind, Paul Bussey and Andrew Shepherd to council. More council members are needed so please get in touch if you are interested in getting involved. You're input and experience would be very welcome.

Until next time. The President.

This article appears in the ACA Journal Autumn 2025 as "From the President: ACA President Patrick Inglis on Collaborative Contracts, BSR Reforms and ACA Council Elections" and was written by Patrick Inglis, ACA President.

--ACA