Download Free Sample
Order New Solution
In October 2020, I was resourced to work on the renovation of 48a Evering Road, a Hackney Town-house, owned by the Director of Mamou-Mani Ltd.- the company for which I was working for at the time. The project consisted of the renovation of a two-storey (116 sq. m) terrace maisonette, covering the two lowest levels of the four-storey building. The building is of a traditional construction with solid masonry walls consisting of red rubber and London stock bricks, previously a betting shop, converted into residential units in 2005. This project presented a few milestone opportunities for the Architecture practice, it is the first full renovation of a residential building the company has taken one - usually the practice engages with complex, parametric and computational design projects in the form of large-scale installations, pavilions or individual design elements, such staircases and facade systems.
I started on the project during Stage 2, whilst pre-planning advice was being sought for the proposed design of the project. I continued to work on this project until my departure from the Practice in July 2022, when the project was in Stage 6 Handover. Firstly, I worked under the instruction of Krishna Bhat (Design Assistant/Visualiser) during RIBA Stage 2, to compile planning documentation, such as existing and proposed drawings, including orthographic drawings, as well as 3D imagery, environment studies, and the production of Design and Access statement, to compose the final planning application. Unfortunately, this project encountered severe issues and delays, including to the planning process.
During Stage 3 and 4, I worked on the project largely independently, with direction from the Client and director of Mamou-Mani Ltd. Arthur Mamou-Mani, to produce developed design drawings and associated detailed drawings, prototype models, the tender package to appoint a Contractor and the subsequent Schedule of Works. This informed the Contractors procurement, for which I drafted and revised the contract, with assistance from James Cheung, who was employed part-time as an Architectural consultant for the Practice. I was also tasked with value engineering for the project, to reduce the cost proposed by the chosen contractor. During these stages issues arose regarding the appointment of the contractor. As this is the first residential project, there was little experience in the requirements for the appointment of a suitable contractor. For this reason, contractual and construction issues proceeded into the construction stage.
From Stage 5 onward, I worked alongside Bilal Mian (Architect, later promoted to Associate Architect) as Contract administrators, during the construction of Evering Road. I continued to develop detailed design drawings, in collaboration with the Design Team, and attempted to work alongside the contractor to resolve construction issues, which required change management protocol. This stage was far from smooth sailing - it experienced a myriad of setbacks including failures from suppliers, onsite discoveries which came close to halting all works and behavioural difficulties displayed by the appointed Contractor. Ultimately, the main issues explored consider the failure of design management throughout the project, especially during the construction phase and the lack of compliance by the Contractor to meet contractual requirements, and how this was dealt with by the Principal Designer and Client. This also made for a turbulent end to the contract and handover process.
Mamou-Mani Ltd is an architectural practice established by Arthur Mani-Mani in 2011 as a Limited Liability Company. It is based in Hackney, and as of July 2021 employed 15 staff - 12 full-time members, and three part-time consulting members including a Senior Architect, Company Lawyer and Website Designer.
Arthur Mamou-Mani is considered an industry expert on Computational architectural design, with his company using software such as Grasshopper and Catia, to produce complex parametric design work. The Practice specialises in digitally-designed and fabricated architecture, custom products and interfaces, in UK and international projects, for both commercial and residential clients. Most projects involve the design of large-scale installations or single architectural elements, which are most often manufactured in association with the sister company to the Practice, FabPub.
FabPub is another Limited Liability Company established in 2011 by Arthur Mamou-mani. It is a digital fabrication laboratory and workshop that has been housed in the same establishment as Mamou-Mani Ltd. since the conception of both companies. Many Mamou-Mani’s Clients appoint the practice due the the proximity of FabPub and the ability to both design and manufacture complex design elements through 3D printing, laser cutting and other modelling methods. This also works in the other way - where FabPub are appointed as Contractors, with Mamou-Mani as sub-consultants for Architectural services. Often both companies work in tandem for a more cohesive planning, design and construction process.
Both companies hold a strong Ethos for sustainability, advocating for cradle to cradle design, with the aim to consider materiality and construction techniques as a priority for all projects. The company does not often rely on or refer to BREEAM or LEED specification to determine which products or materials will be used for projects, but will conduct several digital and physical experiments to ensure a provened process is used, which reduces the embodied carbon of the project. There is specific emphasis on the use of robotic techniques and how they can be used to produce environmentally viable construction techniques, hence the collaboration with Fabpub on more projects.
Evering Road is owned by the practice’s director (Arthur Mamou-Mani) and Website designer (Sandy Kwan), meaning the architect and Client are one in the same. The intention for the completed development is for the Client to use as their primary residence, for the foreseeable future. This is demonstrated in the bespoke design of the project, including personalised aesthetics, and the installation of elements Patented by the Clients company, specified in the scope of works - The clients do not have any intention to sell, and as their are also the PD, their intent is to have complete design control throughout the project.
In addition, to further demonstrate the Client/Architects devotion to sustainable design, one of the main outcomes for the project was for the property to be used as a ‘Showhome’,
demonstrating new and innovative design and manufacturing techniques, to produce an ‘eco-home’, with the intention of expanding residential design services to future private clients. The Client intended to use as many sustainable methods of construction and environmentally viable building materials as possible to achieve this, holding regular open-house events to create marketing gains for both Mamou-Mani Ltd. and Fabpub.
The Client further intended to form partnerships with sustainable manufacturers and suppliers, for the practice to work with in the future. As there was also a vested interest in several supplying companies, to showcase their products effectively and potentially gain further business in the future, this would make them stakeholders for the project. This was never agreed in a written contract signed or verbal agreement, however supplier companies continued to work together for the duration of the project, in exchange for social media coverage and concessions on cost of products.
It may have been in the clients best interest to produce contacts for the various stakeholders to agree on methods of marketing and any future cost agreements, this would have presented any risk of increased project, due to companies withdrawing on the agreed upon partnerships.
Stakeholder diagram
As the project Clients are part of the appointed architecture practice, they chose to negate the signage of an Architect’s Appointment. To minimise conflict of interest, it was decided internally that the director would act solely as the Client, with the Practice (Mamou-Mani Ltd.) named PD. This meant that a different member of the practice team acted as project Lead throughout the process. This started with a Design Assistant/Visualiser during Design phase (stage 0-2), Myself, a Part II Architectural Assistant during pre-construction phase (Stage 3-4) and a Qualified Architect during construction phase and Handover (stage 5-7).
If an Appointment was agreed, the client should have used a Domestic PSC for Architectural Services, defined as a 'consumer contract' thus Consumer Rights Act 2015 would apply.
Furthermore, as the company does not have previous experience with residential projects, which risked the ability of the architect to deliver the project with reasonable skill and care. For these reasons, one could argue best practice would have been for the Client to appoint
an architect outside his own company. A PD with residential experience could have been appointed with a Domestic PSC for Architectural Services, with the stipulation that the Client’s practice is appointed as Design or Sustainability consultants, using a Sub-consultant PSC for Architectural Services, to allow the Client to support in the areas of the project for which him company has expertise, as there was a high requirement for bespoke features for the build
Alternatively, with the existing structure of the Client’s practice acting as PD, a different company with experience with residential projects, could be appointed Architectural consultants using the Sub-consultant PSC for Architectural Services, to aid with the project, and potentially act as CA during construction stages.
As both Client and PD, there were a mix of responsibilities for the Architect. With the contractor taking on the client’s CDM duties to plan, manage, monitor and Co-ordinate the project as well as their own, during the construction phase.
Furthermore, as the client had stipulated their intent to use the project to market their own companies, it is difficult to determine whether the client should have acted as a commercial client, rather than a Domestic. This would have differed their CDM duties, as a commercial client is expected to uphold duties for health and safety of the building, from the start of the project to post-completion of the construction.
In order to retain full design control and flexibility of the project, the Clients chose to proceed with the Traditional Procurement route. The client understood very early on that variations & Architect instructions would need to be given. Specialist subcontractors can also be stipulated into a standard contract. As the Architect had already chosen the sub-consultants that they required to work on the project, it was important to choose a route which allowed them to be easily contracted for works. This would have been suitable for the project, if an appointment was signed, and Mamou-Mani Ltd. wanted to specify the design, manufacture and installation of work from FabPub. This route also affords the Architect to assume the role of PD and CA.
On the other hand, the traditional route is not beneficial for projects which do not have a complete set of drawings pre-tender, as this could lead to delays and increase project costs resulting in claims of negligence. A design and build route could have mitigated this risk, as the contractor could make up for this with their Design work, however, this would have removed the possibility for design flexibility.
As most of the projects Mamou-Mani undertake are specialist parametric projects, they have maintained relationships with various sub-consultants, who are repeatedly appointed by the practice. This was no different from the evering road project - These three sub-consultants were all decided by the Client in pre-planning stages.
- Structural engineer - only contracted for staircase and rear facade. Well known to the Architect Practice, and have worked on the majority of work requiring structural works with Mamou-Mani. There exists a proven ability to work alongside each other to produce quality work, with Fab-Pub as the contractor for many projects as well.
- MEP engineer, known as a personal friend to the client, and specialises in environmental ventilation solutions. Enlisted be responsible for the design of the MVHR system, as well as electric and plumbing systems.
To satisfy further core tasks set out in the plan of works the following team of sub-consultants were initiated..
- Contractor was appointed after the tender process as Principal Contractor, initially a site manager and contracts manager were included in this team.
- Fire Safety Strategist appointed to consult regarding methods of fire and life safety
- Building control officer appointed for consultation with all regulatory construction matters
- Party wall surveyor appointed manage affairs regarding adjoining works
The MEP engineer was released from the project due to personal circumstances. This somewhat complicated the agreement with the contractor, who eventually agreed to take over MEP detail, with the exception of the MVHR system which was specified on the scope of works, which would have an impact on the Standard form of Contract that was used for the project.
As there was no Architects appointment, there was no fee from client to company, and fees for sub-consultant were paid directly from the client to respective companies, based on an hourly rate. This meant that the project was run as a training project. Furthermore the Client/practice director expected to subsequently make money from the project through marketing the Sister company, FabPub, as their manufacturing services, which would be utilised for on the project, as well as bespoke FabPub furniture that would go into the property. The home would also be used as a market for other companies' sustainable products, with the intention to form lasting working relationships with suppliers and exchange online marketing (social media) for promotional discounts for their products. This succeeded with a few of the suppliers offering 20% discounts in exchange for continued social media promotion by the Client.
This approach was a calculated risk by the Practice director. It somewhat paid off, but saving money in construction cost, however, this is not so beneficial to the Practice, as it is to the client personally. As no fees were received into the copy to cover the cost of resources and overheads, the client could only assign a limited amount of resource to this project, which led to overtime being taken, and difficult sticking to the agreed programme of works.
There were several issues with scope creep from the client's side - proposed works continue to involve, extension of the lower ground floor level to form a utility room, with installation of a pavement skylight, and complete interior renovations, including structural works to install a new staircase, and replacement of the rear façade. This was in part due to the contractor promising construction works as "good will gestures" were broken by the contractor; the client had to pay for them, resulting in the increase in project's value from £170 at the time of the tender to £360k contractual value.
If the client had insisted on a contract being signed with the contractor immediately after the tender was accepted, there would have been contractual particulars in part to mitigate these circumstances and stipulate which works the client would be paying for. Moreover, the client could have disallowed such works to continue once it became clear that the contractor was
no longer upholding their promises.
Moreover these issues caused severe delays. The contractor provided a Master programme for the project, prior to demolition works commencement. Throughout the programme, with the rising cost of the project, the Client/Architect continued to attempt to value engineers. However the change in scope would often increase the time scale of the project. The
damage for this was heightened as the contractor was not willing to follow change protocol, not submitting time extensions when necessary or producing updated project programmes when requested. This was particularly distressing as the time constraint was further increased when the client learnt they were expecting a baby.
The client entertained the idea of a loose design during stage 1 and 2, aiming to understand the parameters of building, and adapting the design to suit a more flexible approach to developed design during stage 3, similar to the experimental design approach the practice takes for external projects. This meant the large majority of building suppliers and methods had not been discussed during the beginning Stages of the project number of products
This may have been ok, if the architect had taken the time to finalise all these developments prior to before the detailed design Stage began. Due to uncertainty with the project schedule and time constraints the project continued to move forward to its own detriment, off-programme, in the hopes this would save money.
Due to their close proximity and overlap in projects, it can be challenging to fully define the relationship between the two businesses. Staff members from Architectural Practice frequently assist FabPub on the manufacturing side of projects, and vice versa. It is challenging to develop the proper resourcing management for both companies because of this grey area. It would be advantageous for the businesses to define their respective tasks clearly as this would reduce any risk when it comes to insurance issues and health and safety regulations in the workplace. It would be advantageous for the businesses to define their respective tasks clearly as this would reduce any risk when it comes to insurance issues and health and safety regulations in the workplace.
The company usually takes on commercial projects and installation pieces, which have been successful for the company, as evidenced by the success and relative fame from burning man 2018 Temple, Galaxia, designed by Arthur Mamou-Mani and constructed by FabPub with the help of 180 volunteers and after construction costs were raised solely from crowd-funding. They usually have a very specific narrative of eco-parametric projects, which is to be considered and incorporated into all projects the company works on. This is generally when received by clients, and often the reason Mamou-Mani is approached for work. In order to expand their scope of Service the practice aimed to use this project as training for future potential residential clients.
As this project was run as a training project, The opportunity to use this project for research and development was also missed. At this time the Practice had not yet begun using BIM programming for their projects. This was due to the high demand for the practice to use other softwares such as Grasshopper and Catia, which, at the time, were not compatible with BIM softwares. However, as Evering Road is a different project to what the company usually take on, it would have been a great opportunity, for the company to explore the use of BIM, especially, as the Director is the BIM, the design phase of the programme could have been extended to allow ample time for the company to develop the use of BIM. using BIM, would have also saved on resources. This strategy would be inappropriate for a commercial project because it lacks a BIM protocol and an implementation plan.
This would have helped the practice satisfy RIBA Code of Professional Conduct 4.1, to maintain appropriate records of the progress, circumstances and communications regarding a project.
As I was the only representative of the Principal designer (besides the Client) who continued to work on the project since its beginning design stages, throughout the process I took up a loose design management role, as the main point of contact for the design team to liaise with subconsultants, suppliers and the contractor team, authorities such as planning, building control, fire safety strategist and planning surveyors. I regularly scheduled, chaired and minuted meetings, including the initial onsite kick-off meeting and subsequent Design Team Meetings and Workshops, as well as value engineering, during post-tender, to reduce the construction cost of the chosen Contractor.
In order to achieve the sustainable ‘showhome’ the client desired, there were major developments that required full planning permission to go ahead. In addition, the client was keen on changes to the exterior appearance of the building, particularly for the rear facade. For these reasons, pre-planning advice was sought on two occasions prior to the final planning application submission.
The final application was submitted to Hackney council on 10th November 2020 With the following amendments to the design of the application.
- Daylight, Overshadowing and Outlook - Emphasis of rights to light for neighbouring properties, ensuring there is no change to the available sunlight and daylight for the adjoining occupiers.
- Privacy of Adjoining Occupiers - Consideration of guidelines for extensions, especially those of more than one storey, that can lead to a loss of privacy for neighbouring properties, due to overlooking from new windows closer to adjacent boundaries.
- Lightwell/Basement extensions - The addition of the pavement light well is necessary for the habitable lower ground floor area to receive adequate daylight.
Unfortunately, during this time the council in question was in the midst of a full administrative lock-down, due to unforeseen circumstances resulting in the termination of most digital documentation by their offices - Hackney Council had been hacked. For this reason, rather than the standard waiting period of 8 weeks to receive a decision on the planning permission, the process was extended to 14.5 weeks, with planning permission being granted, with standard conditions on 19th February 2021.
Time used to begin investigative works on the site, as well as removal of fixed furnishing, and soft demolition works. This was a calculated risk taken by the client, as if the application was rejected, the property would not be in a condition to live in. if for any reason the home was required as a dwelling, prior to the beginning of construction works.
These conditions included standard permission for the expiration of the permission, as well as assurance the development and proposed materiality will continue in accordance to the application made. Additionally, two specific standard conditions where made
All in all, it was good practice for the architect to seek pre-planning advice to the projects as advice can save you time and money by lessening the risk of a rejected application, especially when there are some unorthodox architectural elements included in the design, as well as adjoining rights to consider. Also, generally the applicants are more likely to get a quicker decision once the application is submitted.
The project was the development of terrace town-house, with shared ownership belonging to two other property owners - property 48b and 48c located on the two floors above, and separate dwelling to the rear of property 48a respectively. This meant that a party wall agreement was required between the client and four other homeowners. A Party Wall surveyor was appointed, to serve all five parties. This only posed an issue when one neighbouring party (the same who posed objections during the planning process) took an extended amount of time to sign the Party wall agreement, before requesting the appointment of an individual Party Wall Surveyor. Party Wall was awarded in early March 2021.
As Party wall notice is a statutory requirement, it was in the clients best interest to gain a Surveyor, considering the lack of experience the Architect Practice has producing residential projects. Normally at least two months before the planned start of work to the party wall. The notice is only valid for a year, so it should not be served too early.
For privacy and overseeing and light pollution the rights of the neighbouring property were duly considered. The differing finished floor levels and window heights on the neighbouring property no. 48c and the project property no.48a, shows there is no direct overlooking (eyeline to eyeline) between the two properties. Beyond this, the first floor window on the left side of adjacent property has obscured glazing, as well as the window of the ground floor positioned well above eye level. In addition, the timber panels are proposed, which will be positioned over the windows of the properties rear on the ground floor, to further limits
overlooking for the adjoining occupier, so that the level of privacy is higher than the existing window placement. The contemporary design of these panels provides the Client with opportunity for a creative design approach. The Architect design had previously proposed a fully glazed facade, with floor to ceiling windows covering the both floors. It was reduced to 37% following pre-planning advice, which suggested the glazing ratio should stay similar to the existing building.
To follow the ethos of the Client, sustainable development was one of the overarching themes in the design of the project, especially true as the home would be used as a showroom to demonstrate residential sustainable development and products. As previously said, the company does not rely on products certified by BREEAM or LEED, as these can often be misleading, without taking into consideration the embodied carbon in transportation, and indirect manufacturing methods, as well as possible underlying ethical issues which may counteract any environment attributes of the product. Alternatively, several of these products were thoroughly independently researched to determine origin, quality of material, transportation methods and ensuring the cradle to cradle approach is followed as much as possible.
The Client aimed to gain a good relationship with the chosen contractor to deliver bespoke construction methods, as well as manufacturers of various leading sustainable products to include in the project.
- Interior cladding and decorative materials
- Central heating and radiators - convection heating
- Use of Exposed walls and reclaimed bricks from demolition works. - Sustainable use of timber - Use of Kebony, pine treated with nature preservative, to develop the properties of hard wood, making it require less maintenance. - Recycled glass tiles
- Ventilation system
New 2020 Plan of Works requires preparation on outcomes for sustainability as a core tasks in stages 1 and 7 to consider. In this regard the Practice actually goes beyond the requirements of best practice, to ensure a call for sustainability is met. Although the industry has made recent changes to encourage designers to consider sustainable projects, the construction industry is the highest contributor to the global crisis, so it should be the role of all designers to ensure all sustainable resources are exhausted within all projects they are involved in.
The practice approach to sustainable design contributes to the projects Design Quality Indicators (DQI) - tools and approaches which encompasses all stages of a project. The development was led by the Construction Industry Council with input from the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) and Constructing Excellence, in this case the aim is to Provide excellence by making 'the design sparkle.and creating a building of distinction' through sustainability.
The local authority acting as the approved inspector was London Building Control. Building control applications, according to the RIBA stages, should take place during the pre-construction production information phase; this would have occurred during stage 2 of the tender process, allowing for additional adjustments to be incorporated prior to contract sum agreement. It was MM's responsibility to ensure that any variations or design changes accounted for building control. Among these regulations are the following from the 'Approved Documents were considered:
Correspondence made with the building control officer to ensure design for the staircase was approved . As the new proposed staircase was shifted from the previous position, it was important to ensure all regulations were met, with regards to pitch height, head and landing clearances, riser, going and nosing calculations, as well as confirmation of material and finishes.
Guarding should be built in accordance with both of the following in a building that may be used by children under the age of five during normal use. To keep children from being enslaved by the guarding: ensure that a 100mm sphere cannot pass through any openings in the guarding, and that children cannot easily climb the guarding: Avoid horizontal rails. 3.2 stipulates all of the following should be considered when providing security: single-family houses
- Stairs, landings, ramps, edges of internal floors 900mm for all elements - External balconies, including Juliette balconies and edges of roof - 1100mm - Ensure that guarding can resist, as a minimum, the loads given in BS EN 1991-1-1
with its UK National Annex and PD 6688-1-1. Worked with structural engineers on screen balustrade design
Fire Safety London were hired as Fire safety Strategists, to demonstrate compliance with Part B1 to the Building Regulations 2010 for proposed new inner bedrooms within an existing multi-storey flat.
The installation of a domestic sprinkler system or a water mist system was recommended to reduce the risk of fire throughout the open plan areas of the flat at the lower ground floor level. Part B1 Building Regulations conditions to satisfy were:
- The maximum travel distance to any point within any habitable room does not exceed 9 metres.
- Cooking facilities are remote from the flat’s exit.
However, the misting system specified by the fire strategist was a very high cost item. And the decision was made to value engineer this item to mitigate the rising project cost. The fire strategy report suggested the lack of 2 door separation between the flat and the communal entrance hallway at ground floor level was acceptable as the proposed open plan areas at the lower ground floor level will be provided with automist system which will mitigate against the build up of smoke within the flat and therefore reduce the levels of any potential smoke spillage into the communal stair. After discussion with the building control officer and fire
strategist, for alternatives to the approved misting system, the general arrangement of the GF was altered to include a secondary FD30 door between the GF bedrooms and LGF to provide additional separation to the bedrooms from the LGF open kitchen.
In this instance the Architect had to work with both the building control officer and Fire Strategist to produce a solution for the client. As the initial recommendations were above the budget for the project, design negotiations were made to accommodate an additional fire door for the building. This was a positive negotiation, which worked to promote safety, showing good practice from the architect, and satisfying Architects Code to uphold safety, and ensure the Clients assets are taken care of.
Alternatively the client could have prioritised the auto mist system and made other changes to the work scope, as this item is purely to protect the safety of the occupants. Particularly with the increased regulation surrounding fire safety, this applies to operational buildings. This is a management/risk-based approach to fire hazards and risk assessment, rather than a rule-based approach; fire risk assessment must include structure/cladding/windows and fire safety routes/systems. The 'Golden thread' of information created during design and construction must be passed on to building managers, which is critical for architects. The Fire Risk Assessment will evolve with the building, informing retrofits and adaptations.
Show drawing of plans before and after fire doors
Highways Act 1980 Section 169 - Control of Hoarding on Highways
Highway authority needed to be contracted regarding the installation of a pavement skylight. This was required to be specified for public use, but also required hoarding protection, as it formed an aperture on a public use highway.
As the Client and PD, MM is responsible for overseeing Health and Safety through guidance, support, site inspections, investigation, and enforcement, as well as managing and monitoring health and safety risks in the pre-construction phase, preparing construction phase plans, organising and coordinating contractor cooperation, and preparing or modifying design elements.
The PC's role in a traditional residential project was to reduce or control foreseeable risks that might arise during construction. We would provide the client with a design risk register as well as a report on the Access, Cleaning, and Maintenance strategy.
On-site, the appointed contract provided a safety procedure that included health and safety inductions using Form F10 (Duty to notify HSE of a construction project). Unfortunately, the contractor issued a health and safety policy that was not updated throughout the course of
construction, despite changes to the scope of works due to onsite discoveries. There was also an increase after the project's site manager (working for the contractor) abruptly left the project after a few months, citing issues of nonpayment from the contractor. This raises a slew of ethical concerns, as well as significantly increasing the onsite risk of safety and project design.
It is not required that the main designer also serve as the PD. If the Client had gone through a more stringent process to appoint a PD with more experience of the potential risks in a residential project, the risk could have been reduced even further. They would also have been tasked with ensuring that MM uphold their duties as Designers, as all parties involved have a legal obligation to carry out their responsibilities in accordance with the Health and Safety Regulations.
Within the office, there is a health and safety policy, as there is a lot of exposed machinery and tools. There are also two appointed first aid trained staff and first aid kits available in the office. This policy could be stronger, due to the nature of the work done by FabPub, it would not be remiss to offer basic first aid training to all staff.
Tender package was sent out immediately after the planning app was made. As the client deliberated for a less detailed design at the beginning stages of the project, with aim of a flexible approach to during stage 3, a two stage tender package was produced to collect initial construction costs from prospective contractors. Its package was sent out as a Selective Tender.
A pre-selected list of contractors were invited to submit tenders in a Selective Tender. As opposed to Open Tender, which would take significantly more time, or negotiated Tender with a single company, which would eliminate the opportunity for competitive tender, this process will help maintain the quality and experience of all contractors bidding for the job.
Selective tendering was the preferred method of achieving best practice in this case. Reduces the amount of tender documentation that must be reviewed once received and shortens tender periods while providing more control over the tender process. It should also make it easier to understand that all contractors tendering have a certain level of competence. Although a Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ) should have been used to shortlist Contractors, the contractors were chosen based on recommendations.
As is for this project, two stage tendering allows the contractor to consult with the design team earlier in the process. After the First stage, when a contractor has been chosen , a limited appointment is agreed to allow the contractor to begin work. This early contractor appointment to speed up the start time of the project, usually using the appointment format
of a bespoke agreement, a consultancy agreement or a pre-construction services agreement, and there is no obligation to proceed to the Stage Two with the same contractor. For this project, the client had the additional requirement to consider the flexible working of the contractor. They wanted a company who was willing to work alongside MM to explore experimental construction techniques, use of new and innovative materials and accommodate fluidity in design approach.
This was an interesting request from the client, as it is not one that is necessary to make for a traditional procurement project. If best practice is followed, the Designer should produce a
full set of construction drawings for the contractor to follow. If the Client has followed the correct procedure and done research to pick a suitable contractor, there should be no need to request any further clarity regarding work ethic. Conversely, it is understandable that the first impression from the contraction would be a contributing factor when making a final decision.
The results of the tender were as follows:
- Contractor 1 - £140k contractual value. This was the lowest offer. The contractor was recommended by a friend of the Client.
- Contractor 2 (CGDNB) - £170k contractual value. It is noted that this contractor presented themselves as very enthusiastic toward the prospect of work with innovative construction methods, were willing to work alongside the Architect, and understood the need for flexibility within the design. Contractor was recommended by an acquaintance client.
- Contractor 3 - £270k contractual value. Contractor was recommended by a colleague, however it was noted, they did not show much tangible enthusiasm toward the project.
In this case, the appointment was secured with CG Design and Build (CGDNB), using a Letter of Intent (see Appendix B.) which enabled the works agreement, in March 2021, as well as stipulated the project start dates and completion, which at the time was scheduled for mid-August 2021, by the Client.
A letter of intent can be signed before the contract is completed, which helps to avoid project delays. This meets the essential requirement of having a written agreement in place before beginning work (ARB 4.4 and RIBA 2.1/2.2). You risk professional misconduct and being removed from the register if you do not have a written agreement.
The second stage of the tender process adds a fixed price to the contract, which can be negotiated based on the first stage's terms or the single tender process can be continued. In this case, after the Contractor received a more detailed design package, the construction valuation increased significantly. To mitigate this, value engineering occurred, which was initially led by the Contracts Manager on the contractor side, and the Schedule of Works was restricted by the Client, who was dissatisfied with the increased cost of the project as a result of the tender process. The Architect team performed their own value engineering, saving approximately £10 000 in construction costs. However, the majority of this was rejected by the contractor and eventually accepted by the Client in favour of suppliers and subcontractors known to the appointed contractor.
CGDNB then began to suggest additional construction works to the scope of works, which they offered to pay for, in order to create a more complete project development to show in both the client's and contractor's portfolios. The work’s include the following, and added a further £10 500 to the final contract value.
- Redecorating of the GF bathroom
- Installation of under stair storage
- Installation of new front door to the property
- Installation of bespoke staircase handrail
Unfortunately, the contractor did not provide a written agreement for these proposals, and the additional works that were requested were shortly added to the project's overall cost for the client to pay. This would contribute to a growing list of additional costs which were added to the valuations.
As these products would not have been included in the project's final cost if the Contractor had not taken the initiative first, the customer should have stipulated that they be excluded from construction costs in the contract. Since the verbal agreement to pay for these works was solely in this instance, the client is unable to assert a claim against it. If the client had
been an independent one, the PD might have broken RIBA CoC 7.1 because no record was kept of the contractor's promises, which directly affected the client's financial situation. In addition, ARB CoC Standard 4.4 requires the Architect to ensure that, before beginning any work, you have entered into a written agreement with the client that covers the contracting parties; scope of work; who will be responsible for what; any constraints or limitations on the responsibilities of the parties; the fee or method of calculating it; and any constraints or limitations on the responsibilities of the parties.
Additionally, MM worked with independent manufacturers and suppliers and removed some custom products from the schedule of works to be produced at a later time. In order to build long-term business relationships with suppliers and exchange internet marketing (social media) for discounts on their products, the home would also act as a market for other companies that sell sustainable items. The fact that several of the suppliers offered 20% off incentives in exchange for the client's ongoing social media promotion helped make this campaign successful.
The PD made a significant error by failing to seek the advice of a cost consultant throughout this process. The Architect was unfamiliar with the cost of a residential project and thus had no insight into the project's contractual cost, other than in comparison to the tenders received in the first stage of the tender process. This would also have elevated the task of value engineering from the Architect to the final design and construction drawings in preparation for Stage 5.
Due to the fact that the client is required to employ the contractor, due diligence should require the client to seek advice from consultants if the client is inexperienced. The architect team's recommendations for the contractor to the client were not carefully considered. On this occasion, it would have been preferable to avoid two-stage tender where possible, as the initially presented projects were too far removed from the Client's full intention; rather, the Client should have taken the time to produce a more detailed overview of the project before going to tender.
The architect assumed the roles of Contract Administrator and PD under the JCT: Intermediate Building Contract with Contractor's Design 2016 (ICD) for this project. Compared to the Minor Works Building Contract, this offers more comprehensive provisions and thorough control methods, but is less comprehensive and shorter than the normal Building Contract. Its application is also adaptable, and bills of quantities are not required. The client has more control over the members of the design team because all
subcontractors, whether picked by the contractor or designated by the employer, are domestic. Additionally, it means that the contractor must estimate each item in the contract and take full responsibility for all specialised companies' work.
Additionally, CDP included provisions for electrical and plumbing services. The MEP engineer was unable to continue working on the project for personal reasons. Both the architect and the contractor agreed that the contractor would be in charge of all MEP work under the CPD section of the JCT contract, with the exception of the specialised MVHR system. However, on signing the contract, it became clear that the contractor lacked PII for their CPD job. They believed it was protected by their public liability policy, but the CA proved this was not the case after conducting some investigations.
At this point, the architect should have at the very least taken all CPD work out of the contractor's hands because the architect would now be responsible for any difficulties with the design work produced by the contractor. In addition, the CA raised concerns with the client about the architect's lack of professionalism in not knowing what kind of insurance is needed for design work, especially given the company's name (CG Design and Build).
According to ARB Code of Conduct Standard 2.3, architects are required to make sure they have access to the communication skills and local knowledge they need to perform their duties. This suggests that since it caused disparity in the MEP package, the architect shouldn't have let the contractor leave the MVHR system out of their CDP. Those who were in charge of this package should have been determined using a design responsibility matrix - Either the complete MEP package in its entirety or select a different subcontractor is to do so.
The project's demolition plans required the contractor to provide temporary construction drawings. These were to be sent to the party wall surveyor since they supported the removal of the old rear facade and the building and the new staircase. Unfortunately, the contractor was unable to deliver these in time, which caused a slight delay in the start of the programme. The architect was required to issue instructions to stop the contractor's risky work as a result of complaints from the client's neighbours.
It was the client's responsibility to see that all parties involved, such as the highway authority, building control officers, and owners of neighbouring properties, were made aware of the start of the work on site.
In addition to demolition and investigative works, the entire site was scanned in 3D to increase the design's accuracy because without the scan, it was difficult to understand what was happening because the building's shape betrayed the numbers. This led to significant design modifications as it revealed previously undiscovered site conditions.
Due to value engineering and the length of time it took for the project to commence, there were a few last-minute adjustments to the scope as well as product inaccessibility. The innovation of heated wall systems for clayworks provides a substitute for heated floors as it was discovered, this could not work with natural wood flooring. The Contractor was
particularly hesitant to employ this product, despite their eagerness during the tender stage. This added more complexity to the project, however the architect team spoke extensively with expert suppliers and established links with authorised installers to ensure the contractor was familiar with the material.
Several of these changes to the scope meant it took a long while to sign the contract and agree on a contract value. There was some scope creep on the client side, though it was mainly due to value engineering. However, several item costs on the scope increased significantly from the tender stage, with no explanation from the contractor. As it is a requirement for the scope of design to be finalised by the client before the signing of the contract, this allowed more and more time for the contract value to increase.
The architect’s took up the CA role for this project, Issuing of Architects instructions and processing of interim certificates, dealing payments and much non-compliance from contractors.
Interim certificates are period certifications of contract sums agreed upon in advance and paid at specific milestones that were contracted to be paid monthly. This also stimulates the Retention Statement.
Since the first interim valuation, the Contractor has failed to accurately record the percentage complete, for which the project's construction cost is paid to the PC. As a result, the contractor is constantly requesting a much larger sum of money than the contract value. Following site inspections, the issue was brought up to the Contractor, with the stipulation that all percentage progression completions are to be recorded at 0%, 50%, or 100% to receive payment, as minuted interim Design team meetings, as well as in site reports issued by the Architect, but this request was largely ignored by the contractor.
A payment schedule was also appended to the contract. This lists every deadline for interim valuations. In accordance with JCT contracts, the employer has 7–12 days after the issuance of interim certificates to prepare a Payment notice outlining the amount under consideration. Usually, this allows the CA adequate time to monitor the progression of the project to be sure the value is accurate. If payment is still not received after four more days (a maximum of 16 days after the interim valuation and five days after the due date), the contractor may then issue a Payless Notice. With the PC, this was not the case; in some cases, the Client's payment was requested a little as one day after the Interim Valuations were produced. Additionally, these Valuations were never distributed in accordance with the planned payment schedule (see Appendix E). Because the interim values were frequently wrong, the client was continually paying more than the contract's worth, which added to their stress and led them to frequently cave in to pressure from the contractor.
Architects are expected, according to ARB Code of Conduct Standard 4.1, to have efficient mechanisms in place to make sure that the business is handled professionally and that
projects are routinely evaluated and reviewed. The CA should have been able to enforce the contract to prevent the contractors' attempts to violate it, but the Client did not believe that doing so would improve the tense atmosphere between the CA, PD, and PC. Instead, the requests of the contractor were frequently followed, which was detrimental to the client and the project.
There would have been less risk of the contractor being so disruptive to the project schedule, fee, and construction cost if the project structure had been followed and the proper design management methods had been used.
The client's side of the project had a number of concerns with scope creep. The proposed work included structural work to install a new staircase, replacement of the rear façade, and extension of the lower ground floor level to create a utility room with the installation of a pavement skylight. This was partially caused by the contractor breaking promises made as "good will gestures"; the customer had to pay for them, which caused the project's worth to rise from £170 at the time of the tender to £360k contractual value.
The contractor mentioned designs that they were not confident in delivering even after the contract was signed, indicating that the discussions with them during the pre-contract meeting were not in-depth enough. As a result, the architect needed to complete additional tasks, which delayed the programme. Additionally, the design team neglected to get the contractor to disclose any site restrictions prior to contract signature, which resulted in ongoing design changes at a late stage of the project. Despite investigation work being part of the scope of work, a thorough examination of the site should have been carried out by a third party before any building started.
This project suffered from a severe lack of design management, which allowed several on-site problems to worsen than they should have, adding to the project's overall delay. Prior to the contractor's appointment, a schedule or route map outlining all significant project milestones should have been created. This would have allowed the architect to independently monitor the development of the design and construction works rather than relying on the contractor's schedule. A Master Design Programme should have been produced by MM, which specified the following.
- Each architectural element, such as MEP systems, structural elements, and staircases, has design freezes for the design team, after which no changes can be made.
- Commencement of Stage 5
- Dates for the start and end of each design element's construction
- Contractor interim valuations and planned on-site Design Team meetings where progress percentages will be checked are finished.
- Any anticipated conferences with suppliers or subconsultants
- proposed date for actual completion
It was discovered that utilities (Land law Utility Easements: water, electricity, and telecom lines) for a neighbouring property are flowing across the clients property during excavation
work for the enlargement of the lower ground level. Construction work was once more suspended until a solution was found because these must stay outside the property.
A significant change control event occurred here. Unfortunately, the project's Change Management process was not very extensive. Clients ought to have started a procedure that complies with the appointment contracts, highlighting any potential deviations as soon as possible (early warnings), such as anything that is outside the agreed-upon scope, cost, or after decisions have been made.
Another significant incident occurred when the Contractor began building a major structural element that did not adhere to the structural engineers' drawings. This caused Architect Instruction to halt work once more because the extension's retaining wall was not built correctly, resulting in flooding of the LGF. The engineer was then required to do additional work in order to solve the problem. Later, it is revealed that the contractor has recurring problems following the architect's drawings - appliances are installed in the wrong places. Specific detailed drawings were ignored, which the Contractor would do repeatedly, especially after the initial Site Manager's absence. These failures to follow drawings continue to cause delays, forcing the Client to pay for damages rather than further disrupting the workflow by terminating the contract. The cost of the discrepancy was negotiated to be split evenly between the Contractor and Client in this case, as the Contractor claimed the filing of revised engineer drawings was unclear.
Further to this, on one particularly bad occasion, in an act of aggression toward the acting CA, the Principal Contractor ripped up several drawings, stating they were not sufficient enough to be adhered to. Several changes were made to the scope of works without the client's knowledge and also discovered after interim valuations were returned. These indices flag several ethical questions concerning bullying within the workplace and how this should be treated by the Client. This occasion should have been investigated by the Architects to determine if the Contractor was fit to continue working on the project.
Severe delay to first fix item for MVHR system - Item is delayed by 4 weeks due to change in customs at Border. Upon arrival the order is found to be delivered incorrectly, with a new lead-time of 10 weeks to correct the mistake. Solution for time delay was negotiated with the contractor, by allowing FB to act as sub-consultant and manufacture the required product, to produce the product sooner than the original supplier.
In addition, the Contractor delayed the tender process for the staircase contractor and failed to give the Client an explanation. This compelled the architect to step in and provide construction cutting files while also making an effort to get a subcontractor to install the stairs. The Architect stepped in to provide contact information and quotes from metal manufacturers known to the practise, but these were rejected by the Contractor, despite their lower fee and shorter lead time, in favour of a subcontractor known to the Principal contractor, who were eventually removed from the site due to poor quality of work, further delaying project completion. Following this, structural engineer inspections of the staircases determined that they were unsafe for use, as the subcontractors had not followed the Architects/structural engineers design work, resulting in a waste of time, money, and resources for the Client.
According to Section 8.4.11 of the JCT particulars, contract termination can be issued issued on the grounds of inability to provide an update of the project programme, inline with the contractual demands - the Contractor willful delayed the progression of the programme for the delivery of a major structural element, which was required to pass building inspection for the property, and despite assistant from the Client and Architect, was unable to rectify the situation, without further cost to the client.
Following all the events of the construction stage of the project, the relation between the Client and PC had become incredibly strained. The project was delayed by 6 months, with the client continually neglecting to produce a revised programme, EOT or proposed completion date.
During this time Contractor was able to deliver the project to a stage where it was approved by building control, however the standard of cosmetic work still required for completion was immense. The Client decided to provide a Completion checklist (see Appendix G.), put together by the Architect to give the contractor the opportunity to reach practical completion by simply amending the worst of the defective items, as outlined on the checklist. This is not something the Architect is ever required to do, rather it is the responsibility of the PC to identify defects, however, in this instance the Client used it as a last attempt to complete the project.
Without consulting the client, it was discovered that the contractor tried to voluntarily liquidate their construction business. The Client may not have been able to recover any project-related expenditures because the Contractor is a private limited business, and the liability would have been with a dissolved firm. Fortunately, HMRC rejected this request.
Since the firm was never actually dissolved, it is difficult to determine whether this action constitutes a breach of the JCT contract.
Mediation advice sought from the RIBA by the architect on 2nd February 2022 (see Appendix K.). Advice from RIBA, CA and Architect's legal advisor was for the Client to cease all work with the contractor, and terminate the contract as soon as possible - Unfortunately, this advice was not taken, soon enough by the Client, giving the Contractor available to continually cause issues for the Client.
Finally, the contract was terminated as a result of the certifications and events listed below:
On 6th June 2022, six months after the agreed-upon completion date, practical completion could still not be reached, resulting in the issue of a non-completion certificate and the first Notice of Specified Default (see Appendix H) were issued. It refers to the Completion checklist as a List of patent faults, which was disregarded by the contractor, who instead used the occasion to ask the Client for more money to cover construction costs even though the defects on the list had not been fixed.
After receiving no response from the contractor, provisions 8.4.1.1 and 8.4.1.2's Second Notice of Specified Default (see Appendix I) was issued on 15th September 2022.
Consequently, on 1st October 2022, 14 days plus one bank holiday following the second Notice of Specified Default, a Notice of Termination of the Contract (see Appendix J) was delivered by hand and email.
Due to all the project delays, the client had to pay out of pocket to cover the unplanned construction expenditures. The failure to give an update of the project schedule in accordance with the requirements of the contract led to the termination of the contract under section 8.4.11 of the JCT. It follows that the appropriate timing for implementing the legal reasons for termination was missed. Over nine months after the project's scheduled end date, the termination process began in September 2022. A notification of liquidated damages provision was also added in the signed contract, giving the client the right to request a reimbursement of £100 each day that was stipulated in the agreement.
Case study themes and events
Uncalculated risks in hiring the selected contractor were taken. Due diligence was not performed to inform the contractor who was being appointed. If the client is inexperienced, this should entail seeking advice from consultants. Architectural consultants on the Architects team were not carefully considered. As a result, the relationship between the Architect/Client and the Principal Contractor, as well as the entire design team and the project, deteriorated. Too many unplanned risks were taken by the director, which cost the organisation money in lost design time. This project ought to have served as a platform for introducing BIM to the industry. Since there was no money coming in from the initiative, resources, which were needed for the practice, could have been spared. The benefit of this would be resource savings for the company's future.
The hiring of cost consultants was necessary ever since the tendering procedure. This would have inspired the Client to prepare a more thorough schedule for the tender process and provided a financially responsible response to take into account when selecting the contractor.
Despite the Client's delays in doing so, the JCT contract was sufficient to enable for the eventual termination of the agreement. The client has the right to try to deduct costs for unfulfilled deficiencies on the list and legal fees from the contractor's final invoice. This wasn't pursued because of the unpredictable nature of the contractors' behaviour.
Key ethical questions
On-site, there were some health and safety concerns. There was a noticeable lack of skilled labourers used, and the contractor appeared to be very hesitant to hire skilled labourers or accept supplier and sub-consultant recommendations for specialist contractors. This raises the project's risk, but it also suggests that construction workers may be underpaid or not paid at all. This is demonstrated by the initial site manager, who abruptly left the project citing a lack of payment for completed work. As professionals, both the architect and the contractor
are responsible for maintaining Health and Safety on the job site. If there were workers in danger due to a lack of skill, the PD should have looked into it.
Client was made aware of the underlying mental health issues the Contactor may have had. This was never addressed, resulting in flaws in the project's progress and an enormous amount of added stress, as the programme was not dealt with adequately and communication with suppliers broke down on several occasions. At times, the contractor was extremely aggressive, ripping up architect drawings during a meeting.
Dealing with the contractor was also a challenge for the design team. Although it was widely acknowledged that he was difficult to work with, his behaviour was tolerated far too long, despite legal advice from the practice's legal advisor and the RIBA, to the detriment of the project and staff morale. In the end, the project was not handled professionally, but it does set a precedent for future projects. In retrospect, dealing with this triggered my feelings of discomfort within the company, which impacted my workflow directly.
Summary of critical analysis
Ultimately, the fact that the Client was also the Architect hampered the project. Furthermore, because the Architect lacked experience with residential projects, they were unable to complete the project to the high standards that the Architects practise is accustomed to. Because the company had no prior experience with residential projects, the architect's ability to complete the project with reasonable skill and care was jeopardised. For these reasons, one could argue that the Client should have hired an architect outside of his own firm.
In this case, traditional procurement was most likely the best procurement strategy to use; however, the lack of due diligence performed prior to the contractor's appointment resulted in the project's failure. Rather than relying on a single recommendation and a good first impression, the architect should have done extensive research on the contractor. As professionals, it is the architect's job to be able to remove sentiments from professional environments when necessary.
There was also a complete lack of design management strategy, which could have helped to recover the project's neglected programme. Tools could have been used to outline all significant project milestones that should have been created prior to the contractor's appointment, for the PD to fully understand what the desired programme is supposed to look like, Instead of relying on the contractor's programme. This would have allowed the architect to independently monitor the development of the design and construction works. The PD should have created a Master Design Programme for all relevant project milestones, from the commencement of the project, not just for construction stages.
Overall, it was unfortunate, but the project was not carried out in accordance with best practices and most likely violated several ARB and RIBA codes of conduct. If the Client had been an independent one, I believe the project would have gone much differently, because if it had gone the same way, the Architect could have faced disciplinary action.
Recommendations for the future practice
This project was a massive learning curve for the practice to grow from.
First, I believe the practice would benefit from a more senior member of the team with more experience. Currently, the most experienced team member has been qualified for 5 years - half of which has not been spent working on traditional route architecture projects. The Practice would benefit from hiring a full-time architect with extensive experience in contract administration and various procurement routes, across a wide range of project types. BIM training would be extremely beneficial to the Practice. This is the industry's future, and the Practice risks becoming isolated, making it difficult to engage with some clients and other design teams. Revit is a particularly powerful tool that should be utilities; however, because this would be a significant change for the practice, they should consider adopting software that, at the very least, allows for the export of IFC conversion format. Hiring a BIM manager or technician could also be an option.
In addition, while working on more complex projects, the Practice requires some design management training or a consultant. The Practice would greatly benefit from being able to independently develop design programmes and schedules, as well as work in the role of CA, especially since they are involved with so many projects that quickly progress to the construction stage. It is critical that the Practice learns to manage projects more efficiently.
The director should take some time to look at the internal relationship between the two companies and allow staff to become fully acquainted with both. MM and FB have a very unique and incredible relationship - it is utilised by Clients, but I believe the director should take some time to look at the internal relationship between the two companies and allow staff to become fully acquainted with both. During initial induction for both MM and FP, I would recommend inductions/introductions to all FP machines for all staff. To properly inform clients about design work, it is critical to understand all of the company's resources and their limitations. I believe the MM is thriving as a business, but some changes to its internal dynamics are still required to realise the practice's full potential.
UK Architects Declare Climate and Biodiversity Emergency Practice Guide. Architects Declare2021
Section 169- Control of Hoarding on Highways. Highways Act 1980
Approved Document B. Building Regulations 2010, (2013 edition)
Approved Document K. Building Regulations 2010, (2013 edition)
About Us. (n.d.). Mamou-Mani. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from
https://mamou-mani.com/about/
ARB. (2017). The Architects Code: Standards of Professional Conduct and Practice. Standard 6
Blyth A. and Worthington J., Managing the Brief for Better Design, 2nd edn, Abingdon, Routledge, 2010
Bussey P., CDM 2015: A Practical Guide for Architects and Designers, 1st edn. London: RIBA publishing, 2015
Bussey, P. (2015). CDM 2015. Newcastle upon Tyne: Steven Cross
Chappell D. & Dunn M. The Architect in Practice, 11th edn., London, Wiley-Blackwell, 2016 Cousins M., Architect's Legal Pocket Book, 3rd edn. Oxon: Routledge. Publishing, 2019
Davies, I. (2014). RIBA Plan of work 2013 guide - Contract administration. London: RIBA Publishing,
HSE, Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. Guidance on Regulations, 1st edn., London, HSE Publishing, 2015
JCT: Intermediate Building Contract with Contractor's Design 2016 (ICD) The architect’s role
National Planning Policy Framework. (2012). London: Department for Communities and Local Government
NJCC, Code of Procedure for Two Stage Selective Tendering, 4th edn., London, RIBA Publishing, 1996
Ostime N., Handbook of Practice Management, 9th edn., London: RIBA Publishing, 2003 Ostime, N. (2013). RIBA Job Book. 9th ed. RIBA Publishing
practice - BAYNES AND MITCHELL ARCHITECTS. (n.d.). Baynes and Mitchell Architects. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.baynesandmitchell.co.uk/practice.html
RIBA, RIBA Code of Professional Conduct, London RIBA Publishing, 2019 RIBA, RIBA Job Book, 9th edn., London RIBA Publishing, 2013
RIBA, RIBA Standard Professional Services Contract 2018; Architectural Services, London, RIBA Publishing, 2018
Sweet & Maxwell, Deciding on the appropriate JCT contract 2016. London: Thomsom Reuters, Publishing, 2017
Udom K.., Which Contract, 5th edn., London: RIBA Publishing. Publishing, 2012
Wevill, J. (2016). Law in Practice - The RIBA Legal Handbook. 2nd ed. London: RIBA Publishing
You Might Also Like:-
Lendlease Pvt. Ltd. Management Assignment Sample
Management Assignment Help - Trends to Follow in 2017
Advanced Financial Management Assignment Help in Australia
Get 24x7 instant assistance whenever you need.
Get affordable prices for your every assignment.
Assure you to deliver the assignment before the deadline
Get Plagiarism and AI content free Assignment
Get direct communication with experts immediately.
Get
500 Words Free
on your assignment today
It's Time To Find The Right Expert to Prepare Your Assignment!
Do not let assignment submission deadlines stress you out. Explore our professional assignment writing services with competitive rates today!
Secure Your Assignment!
+61 435 881 621