In line with our policy to act in the public interest, we work to investigate and resolve any on-going misuse of title in business or practice related to architecture as quickly as possible. In reaching a decision as to whether to prosecute, two principles are applied: the public interest test (including for example the risk of the defendant reoffending and evidence of client harm) and the evidential test – whether there is a sufficient prospect of proving the case. The prospect of success will usually be determined by the quality of the evidence available. Two recent cases involving misuse of title in website domain names and email addresses resulted in successful prosecutions by ARB.

Company ordered to pay over £3,000 in fines and costs for misusing the title

On 15 April 2015, Nigel Lasseter and his company Cadz Limited, based in Birmingham were ordered to pay a total of £3,476 in fines and costs after pleading guilty to misusing the title architect. The business had not employed an architect for a number of months and had failed to amend its website to take account of the fact. In addition, several domain names that included the title architect had been created as a further advertising vehicle for Cadz Ltd. Mr Lassetter had also used the affixes ARB and RIBA after his name, despite never being registered with ARB or a member of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA).

Practice fined for a second time for misuse of title

On 29 April 2015, a different case of misuse of title was heard when Mr Youno Kim trading as Extension Architects pleaded guilty for continuing to use the title in his website and email address, despite there being no architects at the practice. This was the second time Mr Kim appeared in Court for this offence having failed to take remedial action after already being prosecuted. Mr Kim was fined £1,000 by the Court and ordered to pay a further £1,248 in costs to the ARB.