Anti-Competitive ‘Homearchitect.ie’ Carries RIAI Logo

Some good points there mulp – did you consider bringing to the attention of the RIAI?

E 125/hr……nice if you can get it! 🙂

This seems to be a new service by Studio D Architects. And Greg Tisdall is a long term member of RIAI council…
I think these guys are just trying to survive and maybe they didn’t realise these issues and they will easily correct them if brought to attention.
??

mega what? hours…

Free visits and what not are fine but at the end of the day…

architects are shooting themselves in the foot and NLMA could be deemed anti

so could a number of big projects

‘network of architects’

This seems to be very misleading, is there a ‘network’ or is it Studio D?

I don’t know if this is anti competitive though or just plain NOT competitive. The initial consultation price seems to be too high so surely people will vote with their feet.

This kind of cooperation often occurs in public service tendering where small practices create a group to tender for a job on the basis that on their own they cannot compete by reasons of minimum turnover/staff levels/insurance criteria.

I think fair play to them if it works.

@reddy wrote:

This kind of cooperation often occurs in public service tendering where small practices create a group to tender for a job on the basis that on their own they cannot compete by reasons of minimum turnover/staff levels/insurance criteria.

I think fair play to them if it works.

A group of small practices cooperating to tender for A job is of course providing A firm quote for one job. The group are still openly competing against everyone else.

This ‘network of architects’, which is apparently backed by the Royal Institute of Architects in Ireland, demands the same fixed price every time. The RIAI backing and resulting level of publicity negatively affects the prospects of other small RIAI practitioners who compete fairly for such work.

Interesting that Greg Tisdall is a long term member of RIAI council…
Makes it difficult to comprehend how he was not aware of the Competition Act given the work undertaken by the Competition Authority vis-a-vis fee scales etc.

@DOC wrote:

E 125/hr……nice if you can get it! 🙂

Anyone out there getting fees like this from your clients?

@SirRaymondMang wrote:

Anyone out there getting fees like this from your clients?

I’m going to put up a post a bit later highlighting a few issues with “HOUSE” magazine.
Constructive criticism from users might help change this RIAI publication into one that is of real use to Architects and the potential clients they wish to attract.

In the mean time, the current issue contains an article which helpfully informs everyone that “architect’s fees range from 12 – 18% of the build cost for the full RIAI service” .

WOW!

I hate to piss on your campfires but there is another way of looking at this:

In March 2009 the Society of Chartered Surveyors estimated the build cost of a detached 1250sqft detached house to be in the region of €185/sqft. That’s in Dublin – it falls to c. €133/sqft in Galway but let’s stick with Dublin

1250sqft at 185/sqft = a build cost of €231,250

Taking the lowest advised figure there of 12% that equals a fee to the architect of €27750.

Let’s analyse the horror brought about by €125/hour

That equates – based on a 7.5 hour working day – to 29.6 days of work for initial brief, design drawings, planning drawings, construction drawings and site supervision.

And that’s to break even – you have to reduce that number by the profit percentage you need. And then remember that the €27750 is a gross fee – inclusive of office overheads, costs, travel, printing etc.

Inclusive of tax.

Let’s say you’re a 2 person practice and the nett fee on that job, if you’re lucky, is c. €11-12k, you work out how many commissions you’re going to need to make a living at 12%

@wearnicehats wrote:

That equates – based on a 7.5 hour working day – to 29.6 days of work for initial brief, design drawings, planning drawings, construction drawings and site supervision.

while i agree entirely with what youve posted wnh…

i have to say that a major factor in some public distrust of architect fee rates is due to some architects charging those rates on builds that did not deserve them…. ie 1250 sq ft bungalow with standard outline spec….. those rates are based on what can only be considered the ‘ultimate’ or ‘platinum’ service…. when the project simply deserved the ‘basic’ service.. ie planner pacifying design, standard 310 cavity build, no off standard details, 6 stage payment inspections….

@henno wrote:

while i agree entirely with what youve posted wnh…

i have to say that a major factor in some public distrust of architect fee rates is due to some architects charging those rates on builds that did not deserve them…. ie 1250 sq ft bungalow with standard outline spec….. those rates are based on what can only be considered the ‘ultimate’ or ‘platinum’ service…. when the project simply deserved the ‘basic’ service.. ie planner pacifying design, standard 310 cavity build, no off standard details, 6 stage payment inspections….

you’ve succinctly described the reason why the country is covered with shite houses

@wearnicehats wrote:

you’ve succinctly described the reason why the country is covered with shite houses

no, the reason the country is covered with shite houses is squarely down to the planners who allowed them….
no permission = no build

@wearnicehats wrote:

I hate to piss on your campfires

Go on – you LOVE it 😀

@henno wrote:

no, the reason the country is covered with shite houses is squarely down to the planners who allowed them….
no permission = no build

Well, yes, ultimately but the planners can only review what’s in front of them.

The point I was trying to make is that, ultimately it’s a business and to essential thing, obviously, is to run your business efficiently. Part of that efficiency is an economy of scale. The replication of detail saves thinking and drawing time. The replication of an entire design is, therefore, profit gold. The downside to this is, of course, that the same banality spreads inexorably across the country as clients who don’t care meet consultants who care even less.

Innovation does not equal efficiency and, therefore, does not equal profit on tight fee margins

The paradox here of course, is that an innovative design, once replicated, is no longer innovative. So you must innovate again and the spiral continues downwards to the nearest Credit Union. I was merely assuming that this collaborative effort is intent on good progressive design and trying to show that, contrary to opinion, the percentages are not high

@wearnicehats wrote:

1250sqft at 185/sqft = a build cost of €231,250

Taking the lowest advised figure there of 12% that equals a fee to the architect of €27750.

Let’s analyse the horror brought about by €125/hour

That equates – based on a 7.5 hour working day – to 29.6 days of work for initial brief, design drawings, planning drawings, construction drawings and site supervision.

And that’s to break even – you have to reduce that number by the profit percentage you need. And then remember that the €27750 is a gross fee – inclusive of office overheads, costs, travel, printing etc.

Inclusive of tax.

Let’s say you’re a 2 person practice and the nett fee on that job, if you’re lucky, is c. €11-12k, you work out how many commissions you’re going to need to make a living at 12%

Dichotomy outlined nicely . Why many architects shy away from this work – from the very clients who need and distrust them most

I can’t understand your problem MULP.

Lots of people form alliances for the purpose of promoting their business, and it doesn’t necessarily mean it is anti-competitive. If it was designed to affect market prices then you might have a case, but a small group in a sea of unemployed architects are unlikely to even aspire to that.

There is a good argument that they might help each other keep up to date with practice developments introduce standards for doing things, and generally offer an improved service, but with the continuity of personel that you don’t always get in larger practices.

€125 is not an astronomical rate – the last time my car was serviced at a main dealer it was €110/hr for a mechanic’s time only. It is true that many architects will not charge for an initial consultaion – we don’t – but I often think we might earn more respect from our clients if we did. If we don’t value our time – why should our clients? If this recession ever ends, I think the only way forward for small practices will be to form just the type of alliance described. There will be no prospect of government work without QA and high turnovers, as this may be the only way of getting into it.

So instead of complaining about this network being “anti-competitive” (while at the same time charging too much!) why don’t you form your own?

Your accusation that a respected member of the RIAI is breaking the law is a very serious one.

@wearnicehats wrote:

I hate to piss on your campfires but there is another way of looking at this:

In March 2009 the Society of Chartered Surveyors estimated the build cost of a detached 1250sqft detached house to be in the region of €185/sqft. That’s in Dublin – it falls to c. €133/sqft in Galway but let’s stick with Dublin

1250sqft at 185/sqft = a build cost of €231,250

Taking the lowest advised figure there of 12% that equals a fee to the architect of €27750.

Let’s analyse the horror brought about by €125/hour

That equates – based on a 7.5 hour working day – to 29.6 days of work for initial brief, design drawings, planning drawings, construction drawings and site supervision.

And that’s to break even – you have to reduce that number by the profit percentage you need. And then remember that the €27750 is a gross fee – inclusive of office overheads, costs, travel, printing etc.

Inclusive of tax.

Let’s say you’re a 2 person practice and the nett fee on that job, if you’re lucky, is c. €11-12k, you work out how many commissions you’re going to need to make a living at 12%

Surely €125/hour is inclusive of profit and overheads?

@goneill wrote:

I can’t understand your problem MULP.

Lots of people form alliances for the purpose of promoting their business, and it doesn’t necessarily mean it is anti-competitive. If it was designed to affect market prices then you might have a case, but a small group in a sea of unemployed architects are unlikely to even aspire to that.

There is a good argument that they might help each other keep up to date with practice developments introduce standards for doing things, and generally offer an improved service, but with the continuity of personel that you don’t always get in larger practices.

€125 is not an astronomical rate – the last time my car was serviced at a main dealer it was €110/hr for a mechanic’s time only. It is true that many architects will not charge for an initial consultaion – we don’t – but I often think we might earn more respect from our clients if we did. If we don’t value our time – why should our clients? If this recession ever ends, I think the only way forward for small practices will be to form just the type of alliance described. There will be no prospect of government work without QA and high turnovers, as this may be the only way of getting into it.

So instead of complaining about this network being “anti-competitive” (while at the same time charging too much!) why don’t you form your own?

Your accusation that a respected member of the RIAI is breaking the law is a very serious one.

At last it clicks: Yes, it is a serious problem. One compounded by the fact that the RIAI appear to be supporting it and it is “organised by a respected member of the RIAI”.

The last time you looked around for car servicing costs did you find a ‘licensed network’ of separate SIMI members all offering to do your work for the exact same price? Even car dealers (pure business people as opposed to professionals) have been taken to task by the competition authority when fixing new car prices, and they were all selling the exact same product (brand).
Have you missed what happened to the Vintners when they tried to to fix prices in order to actually stop any price increases?

Lots of people do indeed form alliances to promote their business, but most of them know the law in relation to fixed pricing.
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Not even in desperate times.

As I said initially, the new & improved RIAI Archi-search site should be promoted and advertised by the institute rather than a service which is anti-competitive, bad for clients and bad for other RIAI member Architects.

Finally what is the intention of your comment: “Your accusation that a respected member of the RIAI is breaking the law is a very serious one.”?
Is it mean’t to worry me? Will you be telling me next that he has impeccable qualifications and won a host of awards?
Please reread my post. I made no mention of any individual RIAI member. That was contributed by others. I then commented that it “Makes it difficult to comprehend how he was not aware of the Competition Act…”

This Protectionist Nonsense is one of the many factors which together contribute to such a low engagement of RIAI architects for domestic extension and one-off new-build work.

Try and take a look from the outside in for a change. You’ll be surprised what it is everyone else sees.

@goneill wrote:

€125 is not an astronomical rate – the last time my car was serviced at a main dealer it was €110/hr for a mechanic’s time only. It is true that many architects will not charge for an initial consultaion – we don’t – but I often think we might earn more respect from our clients if we did. If we don’t value our time – why should our clients? If this recession ever ends, I think the only way forward for small practices will be to form just the type of alliance described. There will be no prospect of government work without QA and high turnovers, as this may be the only way of getting into it.

So instead of complaining about this network being “anti-competitive” (while at the same time charging too much!) why don’t you form your own?

By the way…
Who said €125 per hour was astronomical? Not me.
My comments on this fee were in relation to:
1. Its fixed price;
2. The fact that many other RIAI members offer initial consultations for FREE, not €125 per hour;
3. That this gives clients no opportunity to even know which architect they will be appointed with before paying €500;
4. And that the client must be paying the organiser’s fee in addition to the architect’s, without being told.

The reason I don’t just go and form my own? For all the reasons stated!

@SirRaymondMang wrote:

Surely €125/hour is inclusive of profit and overheads?

that’s what I said!

@mulp wrote:

At last it clicks: Yes, it is a serious problem. One compounded by the fact that the RIAI appear to be supporting it and it is “organised by a respected member of the RIAI”.

The last time you looked around for car servicing costs did you find a ‘licensed network’ of separate SIMI members all offering to do your work for the exact same price? Even car dealers (pure business people as opposed to professionals) have been taken to task by the competition authority when fixing new car prices, and they were all selling the exact same product (brand).
Have you missed what happened to the Vintners when they tried to to fix prices in order to actually stop any price increases?

Lots of people do indeed form alliances to promote their business, but most of them know the law in relation to fixed pricing.
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Not even in desperate times.

As I said initially, the new & improved RIAI Archi-search site should be promoted and advertised by the institute rather than a service which is anti-competitive, bad for clients and bad for other RIAI member Architects.

Finally what is the intention of your comment: “Your accusation that a respected member of the RIAI is breaking the law is a very serious one.”?
Is it mean’t to worry me? Will you be telling me next that he has impeccable qualifications and won a host of awards?
Please reread my post. I made no mention of any individual RIAI member. That was contributed by others. I then commented that it “Makes it difficult to comprehend how he was not aware of the Competition Act…”

This Protectionist Nonsense is one of the many factors which together contribute to such a low engagement of RIAI architects for domestic extension and one-off new-build work.

Try and take a look from the outside in for a change. You’ll be surprised what it is everyone else sees.

before commenting on the legal side of it does anyone know how exactly this process works? Is this a network of individual companies or is it a single company that then pays individual companies? Or is it a collaboration?

I appreciate Mulp’s comments on tendering but, in a sense, is it any different from me not being able to take on a commission and handing it over to a friend? this is very common, especially where small firms club together to share office space

For the record if I was in any way interested in nixers I might give an initial consulation free but no way would that last more than an hour. if it was a full day – as this lot do for a larger scheme – I’d definitely be charging a minimum of 500 bucks, probably more. It would be percentage based thereafter though, not an hourly rate

@wearnicehats wrote:

That equates – based on a 7.5 hour working day – to 29.6 days of work for initial brief, design drawings, planning drawings, construction drawings and site supervision.

And that’s to break even – you have to reduce that number by the profit percentage you need. And then remember that the €27750 is a gross fee – inclusive of office overheads, costs, travel, printing etc.

Inclusive of tax.

Sorry, but then your sums above are not to ‘break even’. The profit is already included in that fee?

€125/hour is not a break even rate.

@SirRaymondMang wrote:

Sorry, but then your sums above are not to ‘break even’. The profit is already included in that fee?

€125/hour is not a break even rate.

sorry, maybe I wasn’t clear. I was merely dividing the rate into the fee to prove a point. You’re right in that an hourly charge out fee will factor in all the overheads, profit etc. for a company

That’s slightly different to my point which was that the 12% fee has to cover everything – profit, overheads etc. I just used the 125 to give an indication of the time that can be spent on a job before you’re eating in to the bottom line

@wearnicehats wrote:

before commenting on the legal side of it does anyone know how exactly this process works? Is this a network of individual companies or is it a single company that then pays individual companies? Or is it a collaboration?

I appreciate Mulp’s comments on tendering but, in a sense, is it any different from me not being able to take on a commission and handing it over to a friend? this is very common, especially where small firms club together to share office space

For the record if I was in any way interested in nixers I might give an initial consulation free but no way would that last more than an hour. if it was a full day – as this lot do for a larger scheme – I’d definitely be charging a minimum of 500 bucks, probably more. It would be percentage based thereafter though, not an hourly rate

sorry – just noticed that it’s €800 for the 7 hour session. question still stands though

MULP There was no intention to “worry” you. Its just I’d be a bit slower to say/imply that our colleague is acting in contravention of the law. The Competition Authority itself appears to be somewhat confused about the true meaning of competition. The price of the Irish Times is the same in every newsgaent in the country. Every civil servant is on the same pay scale. Even the doctors have recently had a universal rate applied to them by some clever avoidance of the competition laws. And, as we have just seen, electricians have agreed minimum rates based on legislation dating from the 1940’s, as do catering staff who must get double time on Sundays if they are outside the capital. I don’t know, but I expect that every McDonalds has the same prices which to me is ok on the basis that the customer is free to go to Burger King. In that respect the conviction of the Citroen dealers seemed to me a little harsh, (after all, the customers could buy Renault if they wanted) but the crucial difference here is that they were pretending to be in competition while effectively operating a fixed price list through varying trade-in prices. They were also affecting the market prices for Citroens, whereas it could not be said that our friends are hoping to affect the prevailing rates for architects or that they are pretending to be in competition with each other.

I don’t know if the client will not know which member of the consortium they will get, or if the organisers are taking a cut. It may be a co-op, and they might be very happy to offer some or all of the members for the client to choose from. Clients of very big firms often get to choose which wretched youth is sent down to design their extension either, so this is hardly a fair criticism.

At least, even if you think a network is anti-consumer, you can take out an ad yourself, proclaiming your free first consultations – and the best of luck.

@goneill wrote:

. Clients of very big firms often get to choose which wretched youth is sent down to design their extension either, so this is hardly a fair criticism.

Sorry, that should have been:
Clients of very big firms DON’T often get to choose

@mulp wrote:

Lots of people do indeed form alliances to promote their business, but most of them know the law in relation to fixed pricing.
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Not even in desperate times.

This Protectionist Nonsense is one of the many factors which together contribute to such a low engagement of RIAI architects for domestic extension and one-off new-build work.

Well said mulp, I agree. (Well done for starting a thread on this)

RIAI Code of Professional Conduct
1. A member shall uphold the integrity and dignity of his profession.

Interpretations Of The Principle 1:
1.2 A member, in providing a professional service and in safeguarding a client’s
legitimate interests, shall comply with all relevant statutory procedures and
regulations.
_______________

Given the above statement in the Code of Conduct
Should the RIAI’s internal conduct committee act to ensure members cease any unprofessional conduct such as claiming to be a network of architects operating on a fixed-price basis (which does not comply with statute law), thereby protecting potential client’s interests with immediate effect (and protecting the majority of architect’s professional reputations),
or
Should the RIAI refrain from intervening and leave the matter for a third party to refer to the Competition Authority, thereby leaving potentially uninformed clients to use an uncompetitive service, provided by an as yet unknown architect, when they could be directed to many architects who are providing initial free consultations through which the client has the opportunity to assess an architect’s ability, work and compatibility prior to agreeing to a negotiated fee, as opposed to a €125 per hour fixed rate & minimum fee of €500? (oh, and more than likely adding to the negative image many lay-people have of architects)
_______________

FAQs from http://www.homearchitect.ie

What is the structure of homearchitect?
Homearchitect is a licensed network. This means that architects apply to join our network, and we select architects based on a set of strict criteria. All of our architects are experienced in domestic architecture and have undergone a full training programme, so you can be sure you will receive high quality, professional advice.

All of our architects are very experienced residential architects and have gone through a full selection and training programme by homearchitect so you can be assured you will be getting the best possible advice.

How about a free visit to see if I like you guys?
We do not believe anything constructive can be achieved in a free 45-minute sales chat. (…Better instead to do the sales stuff upfront via the impersonal website and get you to stump up a min. of €500 before you even thought of a question to ask us). Our initial visits are designed to get your project going as quickly as possible. We ensure you are fully involved in the process, in control and clear about what is happening…. Except perhaps the basics, such as which Architect will even turn up at your door. Sorry, no control permitted on that one!

My opinion is that this service, as presented, is clearly in breach of statute law and the RIAI’s code of conduct. Much better if the RIAI acted to ensure professional conduct is maintained and professional reputations are retained.

@wearnicehats wrote:

before commenting on the legal side of it does anyone know how exactly this process works? Is this a network of individual companies or is it a single company that then pays individual companies? Or is it a collaboration?

I appreciate Mulp’s comments on tendering but, in a sense, is it any different from me not being able to take on a commission and handing it over to a friend? this is very common, especially where small firms club together to share office space

was this cleared up?

@mulp wrote:

What is the structure of homearchitect?
Homearchitect is a licensed network. This means that architects apply to join our network, and we select architects based on a set of strict criteria. All of our architects are experienced in domestic architecture and have undergone a full training programme, so you can be sure you will receive high quality, professional advice.

All of our architects are very experienced residential architects and have gone through a full selection and training programme by homearchitect so you can be assured you will be getting the best possible advice.

Any potential client coming to their site can only go on the clear description given above.
It does seem unambiguous in its claim to be a network, not a single company and not some collaborative group.
Home Architect is not registered as an RIAI member practice.
Wonder what the situation is regarding professional indemnity and contract. A client could unwittingly find themselves in a situation where they have no direct contractual relationship with the actual architect who provides the service…

@mulp wrote:

Any potential client coming to their site can only go on the clear description given above.
It does seem unambiguous in its claim to be a network, not a single company and not some collaborative group.
Home Architect is not registered as an RIAI member practice.
Wonder what the situation is regarding professional indemnity and contract. A client could unwittingly find themselves in a situation where they have no direct contractual relationship with the actual architect who provides the service…

I don’t see how this clears up the method of payment issue. As such, therefore, the collaboration / network / single company issue is still unclear. Criticism still seems to be based on unsubstantiated hearsay

Is metro north anti competitive? where architectural components ever tendered?