Milan Babic of Milan Babic Architects Ltd has been reprimanded by ARB’s professional conduct committee (PCC) for allowing a junior member of staff, who was not an architect, to prepare and submit planning applications
The PCC issued Milan Babic with a reprimand following an admission of unacceptable professional conduct (UPC).
Babic had been instructed to submit planning applications for proposals to develop a property owned by his client. He was also instructed by the freeholder of the client’s property to prepare drawings for the development of the property.
The allegation
It was alleged that Milan Babic allowed a junior member of staff, who was not an architect, to prepare and submit the planning applications and that he failed to adequately supervise his employee.
The ARB has particularised the allegation as follows: ‘In respect of a planning application submitted to Westminster City Council dated 11 January 2017, the respondent did not ensure that the junior member of staff was adequately supervised when preparing and submitting the application’.
The applications in question were submitted with a number of errors; for example, the applicant was incorrect, and the address included in the application was incorrect, which resulted in the council granting planning permission based on incorrect information.
Babic agreed this amounted to UPC. He waived his right to have the case heard at a public hearing and agreed a decision could be made by the PCC on the basis of the papers alone.
Disciplinary order
In considering the case, the PCC noted Babic’s admission and insight into his failings, along with his good disciplinary history, while acknowledging the potential impact of his actions on the reputation of the profession.
The PCC decided there was a low risk of repetition and considered a reprimand to be the appropriate disciplinary action to enforce.
This article seems to be out of proportion! This is not a big deal, we sometimes make mistakes with planning applications and the planning department call us to add a scale bar, or north-ing… so not much of a problem. However, the correspondence with planning authority with the wrong address should have been noticed early.
If the architect is found guilty, the planning consent should be stripped off and a new application submitted, otherwise, the poor bloke will not be paid.
This is unusual and my stance it that there is a bit more to it.