The Professional Conduct Hub

The PCC reports on three disciplinary cases 

The Disciplinary Board found that a Chartered Member failed to provide a brief or breakdown of costs before commencing work; failed to accept numerous instructions from the Owners to terminate work; made unfounded and derogatory assertions about the Complainants that were reckless, and which injured the reputation of the Complainants; failed to uphold the reputation of the profession; and failed to act with integrity and fairness. 

The PCC found that a Graduate Member failed to respond to requests from the checking engineer; failed to demonstrate the competency required to undertake work that involved basement works with adjacent properties; failed to provide evidence of Professional Indemnity insurance cover; and failed to provide adequate terms of engagement. 

A complaint was made to the Institution regarding the content of a structural appraisal written by a member in relation to damage to a porch. Taking all matters into account the PCC found that the member included in their report letter an irrelevant, unwarranted and wholly inappropriate description of their client.  The PCC found further that reference to a person’s nationality and/or physical size, or any description of a person’s demeanours, has no justifiable place in a professional report such as that provided by the member.

A complaint was made to the Institution arising out of the appointment of a member to provide structural engineering services for an extension of the basement of a property. 

The Board found that a member had breached Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Code of Conduct, and in particular, that the member deliberately sought to mislead the Disciplinary Board whilst giving evidence at a hearing on 14 March 2017.