refusal of extension by neighbours on appeal, agent's credentials not as claimed

[annoyednow]

To continue with this saga (sorry, yawn, I know) but as stated, neighbours have appealed their refusal of planning decision.

Their agent still states that party wall in not so despite further contacts with our chartered surveyor. One thing that is bothering me is in relation to a visit I made to the local authority to view the file. When the planner referred to our surveyor as a party wall surveyor, I said he was a frics (as I know anyone without any qualification can call themselves a party wall surveyor). The planner said they (the inspectorate) would see that from his heading anyway. I then looked at the heading of next doors design agent/party wall surveyor. He had the logo of a professional organization and on his website claimed to be a member of this.

The difference from his professionalism and the professional body's status seemed vast so I rang them to see if he was a member. He is not. He was previously a technician member and they said as such was never entitled to use the logo. Even this technician membership has now lapsed. They rang him to tell him he is not entitled to use it.

My concern is the documents sent by him with this professional heading crest which is on file and current with the appeals inspectorate will give him a credibility which he does not have. This is not unfounded as the council's planner referred to my frics agent's heading.

What should I do or should I so anything to let the appeals inspectorate know that appellant's agent is posing as a professional?

It is a householder appeal, so I/or council do not have any right to comment.

I think your last sentence tells you all you need to know!

I'd ask the RICS to contact the council and warn them that this person is fraudulently using the logo and to be aware of that in any applications he is involved with. If they won't ask them to write to you with the facts and you could forward it to the council in a "for your information" way. It seems sensible to do what you can to ensure that they are aware of the issue but obviously it's up them what, if any, impact it has on their consideration of the appeal.

As you say, generally you don't get a right to comment on the application but I'd say this is different. You are bringing to their attention fraudulent behaviour by an individual who happens to be involved in an application you have an interest in.

The Inspectorate won't be interested in the credentials of your neighbour's agent. It is not for them to make any judgement on that, rather for RICS to take any action they feel fit if they think he has wrongly been using their logo, or your neighbour if he gives duff advice which ends up costing them. The Inspectorate will simply return your comments to you.

More fundamentally, the Inspectorate also won't be making any assessment of whether it is a party wall or not. They will simply be looking at the planning merits of the case, not the civil issue of the Party Wall Act.

You need a solicitor to advise you - these are not planning issues.

Thanks for replies. Yes londonone, but this is not in relation to the subject matter of the appeal.

Good idea HappyCamel, I've just rang up and relevant guy will call back. It would probably be a good idea to have a copy if this insistence of it not being a party wall despite our expert stating it is continues. I now know they have had no expert opinion at all. I think it is evident why we have had so much trouble. Guy's a sham. It's fairly crooked to falsely purport to a professional status.

Flosshilde, the boundary is incorrectly drawn on the drawings submitted by this guy. The party wall is central to his interpretation of this. It's the possible weight given to his opinion 'cos of fake prof. status which concerns me.

Person from professional body has just phoned and will send me letter stating that this guy is not a member of his org. and is not entitled to use logo etc. That is good to be going on with I guess. He