Report of the Professional Conduct Committee 20 February 2024

Author: Rui Carvalho Pais, Professional Conduct Manager

Date published

8 January 2025

The Institution of Structural Engineers The Institution of Structural Engineers
Back to Previous

Report of the Professional Conduct Committee 20 February 2024

Tag
Author
Date published
Price
Report
Author

Rui Carvalho Pais, Professional Conduct Manager

Date published

8 January 2025

Author

Rui Carvalho Pais, Professional Conduct Manager

A summary of the outcome of 2 cases are published

In accordance with Procedural Rule 2.31 (01/22/V4REG4_2) the following summary of a decision of the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) is published without the Member's name.


A complaint was made to the Institution arising out of the appointment of a member to carry out a structural survey of a roof, in advance of an intended sale of the Property. 

Taking all matters into account the PCC found that the Member failed to address properly, or at all, his client’s concerns which clearly set out that the intended services had not, in the client’s view, been carried out in full.

The PCC also found that the Member failed to follow up in writing a conversation which had taken place on site which broadened the scope of the initial instruction, and that the Member, by doing so, mis-managed the expectations of his client.

The PCC, taking into consideration its findings above, found that that the Member had failed to comply with Article 3 of the Code of Conduct.

The PCC issued the sanction of Guidance to the Member, pursuant to Regulation 4.2.2.1(1), in the following terms:

"Members should take all reasonable steps to understand and define the brief with the client. This should be provided to the client in writing, thereby providing a clear and shared understanding prior to the commencement of services. If it becomes apparent that the scope of work and/or the fee eventually chargeable will differ from that originally agreed, the client should be advised of this at the earliest opportunity of it becoming apparent."

_________________________________________________


 

In accordance with Procedural Rule 2.31 (01/22/V4REG4_2) the following summary of a decision of the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) is published without the Member's name:


A complaint was made to the Institution arising out of a Graduate Member’s submission of a structural report and calculations to a Building Control authority. 

Taking all matters into account, the PCC found that the Graduate Member’s submission to the building control authority in relation to approaches to disproportionate collapse, was largely identical to templates privately owned and used by another structural engineering firm (“the Complainant”), and that the Graduate Member had not obtained the consent of that firm to use their intellectual property.  The PCC also found that the Graduate Member’s submission was rejected by the building control authority due to the calculations included therein not being accurate.

The PCC, taking into consideration its findings, found that the Graduate Member failed to act with integrity (breach of Article 1 of the Code of Conduct) and that the Graduate Member accepted to undertake a task for which the member was not demonstrably competent (breach of Article 5 of the Code of Conduct).

The PCC issued a Reprimand against the Graduate Member, the highest sanction available to it, pursuant to Regulation 4.2.2.1(6),  followed by a direction for the member to provide an Undertaking, pursuant to Regulation 4.2.2.1(4), in the following terms: 

I, <member’s name>, shall ensure: 

  1. that any engineering calculations intended for critical work, for which I am responsible, are checked by an appropriately qualified engineer until such time that I have attained the relevant experience, knowledge and skills. 

  2. that consent is obtained, in writing, from the relevant person before using their software or intellectual property. 

The PCC also ordered the Graduate Member to issue an Apology to the Complainant, pursuant to Regulation 4.2.2.1(2), and, issued the following Guidance to the member, pursuant to Regulation 4.2.2.1(1):

Members of the public and other professionals rely on, and make decisions based on, the advice and service provided by members of the Institution of Structural Engineers. The advice given, either verbally or in writing, including calculations and drawings, must be fair, honest, and trustworthy, in order to provide a safe and effective service for clients and their agents.

Honesty is essential. Operating with integrity and fairness engenders respect from clients and other professionals and provides a platform for open communication and effective professional relationships.




 

Related Resources & Events

Visit
<h4>Application Status of Integrated Construction (MiC) in Hong Kong – Technical Visit</h4>

Application Status of Integrated Construction (MiC) in Hong Kong – Technical Visit

Technical Visit to Modular Integrated Construction (MiC) Factory in Mainland China

Date – 29 March 2025
Location – Huizhou and Pingshan, Mainland China
Price – HK$600
Lecture
<h4>HS2 A452 Kenilworth Road Overbridge</h4>

HS2 A452 Kenilworth Road Overbridge

A Joint IStructE/ICE Technical Presentation on the design and construction of the HS2 A452 Kenilworth Road Overbridge

Date – 28 January 2025
Location – AECOM Basil Close Chesterfield, S41 7SL
Price – Free
Webinar
<h4>Incorporating timber into your structure – how to ensure success</h4>

Incorporating timber into your structure – how to ensure success

Enhance your skills with practical insights and innovative solutions in modern timber design.

Date – 30 January 2025
Location – Online
Price – £45 - £70 + VAT