Problem: My wife and I are in the early stages of renovating a private property we purchased, of which once completed, we plan to move into as our home. No work has started on site yet, but we have employed a firm of architects who had been progressing the design.
A few weeks ago, we complained to the architects regarding their design and plans. The complaint related to a general failure to follow our brief and budget constraints. Instead of apologising and saying that they would revisit the design and ensure that it was to our brief and within the budget, they sent a letter which claimed that we were being difficult and had subsequently decided to terminate the agreement with us. The letter gave 21 days-notice to bring to an end the contract and referred to clause 12 of the agreement.
This has shocked us. All we want is the design work done to our brief. The clause quoted by the architects I consider is unfair, but the architects state that they do not need a reason to terminate under that clause and have refused to reconsider their position. Additionally, we still haven’t received all documents / plans paid for, and the architects are not responding to our attempts to discuss this.
What are our options?
Response: You also sent a copy of the terms and conditions you have with the architect, and I was able to read the clause that you have referred to.
Clause 12 is [of course] the termination clause and there are 3 sub-clauses to this clause. The sub-clause that the architects are relying upon, no doubt, is clause 12.1 where it states, in full, that: “Either the Client or the Consultant may terminate this agreement by giving twenty-one days written notice of termination of the agreement. No reason needs to be given for terminating the agreement.”.
Since you are acting as consumers, your contract will covered by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and under that Act, amongst other things, your attention must be drawn to your right to cancel the contract within 14 days of the contract being entered into (if the contract was entered into away from the premises of the business), and the terms and conditions must not be unfair.
I see from the copy of the contract that you sent to me, the terms and conditions do clearly advise of your right to cancel (although you want the opposite of this), whilst the termination clause per se does not appear to be unfair. A clause can be said to be unfair if it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer. Transparency is also fundamental to unfairness and the Act requires that a written term in a consumer contract is expressed in plain and intelligible language and is legible.
I doubt therefore, that you would be successful in mounting a challenge to the termination.
Clause 12.3 of the contract states that you (as the client under the contract), must pay the architects’ fees for the services provided up to the date of termination. You should therefore request a final statement from the architects and before you pay any monies outstanding, you should make clear to the architects that you expect them to issue all of the work they have said they have done in a format that will allow the replacement architect to finish the work. You will also need to inform the architects that you will be making use of their intellectual property (and seek written confirmation), otherwise the work that they have done would be worthless and thus no monies are due.
© Michael Gerard 2023
The advice provided is intended to be of a general guide only and should not be viewed as providing a definitive legal analysis.
Author background
Michael is a Solicitor, Chartered Builder & Registered Construction Adjudicator, and is a director at Michael Gerard Law Limited, a solicitors practice regulated by the SRA.