Words:
Alistair McGrigor

For owners to win redress under the 1972 Act, a dwelling must be unfit to live in

Architects need to be aware of their possible liabilities under the Defective Premises Act 1972.  By taking on work for the design of a new dwelling (or the creation of several new dwellings from the conversion of an existing single building, for example) an architect will be liable to the person commissioning the works – or to a future owner of the works – if the design is not carried out in a professional manner so that the dwelling will be fit for habitation when completed.

This is not limited to the first owner or first purchaser, but will apply to all parties who in the future acquire an interest in the dwelling.  The existence of mere defects does not create liability, the dwelling must actually be unfit for habitation for an architect to be liable.

Another key risk for architects to be aware of is that the test is whether the architect has acted in a ‘professional manner’.  

That may not involve negligence on the part of an architect, and therefore the professional indemnity insurers may not cover an architect’s liability for the claims under the DPA, unless there is also negligence on the part of the architect.

Latest

What is enough? Matthew Dalziel, co-curator of the Oslo Architecture Triennale, talks about degrowth and libraries for sharing more than books

Oslo Triennale curator asks what is enough?

Trial installations shroud buildings with algae-filled curtains that absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen

Algae-filled building shrouds that eat CO2

Communal space, resident input to the design, and sacrosanct private space – Mole Architects’ Marmalade Lane scheme in Cambridge is a model of developer co-housing

Communal planning with sacrosanct personal space

Young photographer Fred Howarth captures Battersea Arts Centre in a moment of transition

‘The dust caught the light in an amazing way’

From shower enclosures to ceiling panels

From shower enclosures to ceiling panels