Architect Fees - taking the piss?

[starshine1926]

I'm intending to renovate my late mum's house with a view to living there for a few years and possibly sell when I retire as the house is on a large plot with space for 3 houses. I have been living there since DM death 2 years ago.

I have a budget of 40k (possibly more) and need to fix the essentials like new heating system, loft insulation etc, as well as knocking down a wall or two.

So I had a free initial visit from an architect as I wanted some ideas on remodelling the inside to increase the light and open it up.

I need a bathroom upstairs which I can convert from a bedroom, I want to fully or partially demolish the wall between the kitchen and lounge, refurb downstairs bathroom and kitchen. New heating system and some replastering due to previous leaky roof. As I am an antiques dealer, I'm not having a fully fitted kitchen. I'm also not bothered about getting everything completely finished as long as the basics are in place.

The architect has quoted nearly £9000 for his services . This consists of £1750 for a condition survey and schedule of works, £1400 for a 3D digital building survey, prelim sketches £950, £750 for developed design, full spec tech drawings and building regs £2350 and 5 site visits at £350. Plus 7% of the bill of any specialist suppliers he provides! And he quoted £800 for a structural engineer!

I have already found out I can get a building condition report for £550 and I only paid £100 to an engineer I know when I placed a beam in another building 2 years ago. I can't help feeling this architect is taking the piss and to be honest he did his best to persuade me to knock the house down and just flog the plots. Also said the plots were worth about 20k beneath what I know plots are selling for in this area.

By the way, I am in South West Wales not Mayfair so his quote seems high. Anyone care to share their experiences? Did you use an architect or just a technician?

Personally I would now use a technician if you know what you want doing what benefit are you getting from an architect.
Good technicians or architects will think more about what is practical rather than just what looks good. In my limited experience you are more likely to get this from a technician as they often have to figure out how to achieve what the architect has specced.
I have just had a house built, things my architect said weren't possible easily were and were put into place by builders. Other things she suggested, which were improvements I agree put the cost up by 13k which she didn't' think to mention or given any indication would affect the price. I've ended up with a lovely place but despite her rather than because of her. Basically she just did the drawings for what I said I wanted and charged me as though she had designed it. A technician could easily have done at least as good a job for a much lower price.

I think it is important whichever you choose to get someone you can talk to, makes an effort to understand what you want rather than imposing their own ideas and comes in with a reasonable quote.

I'm getting the strong message from your post that you don't trust the architect. That's ok, they are professionals (in the traditional sense) so trust is the important thing.
We interviewed about 6 different architects when doing our extension (turned into more of a remodel once they started creating ideas) and would only have been happy to go with two of them in the end.
Architects are invaluable, even if you are experienced, unless you're an experienced architect yourself you won't be able to do as well as them. Whether it's a good investment is up to you, but personally I'm glad we used one despite the cost being similar to yours.
One thing i would say is condition survey isn't a standard thing, it's a process. Same with structural engineer, calculating a beam is cheap but doing detailed structural design is not.
Structural engineers are like accountants, on a big project a good one can save far more than they cost.
I suppose architects are like doctors, they listen to you and work out what's really necessary and then make it happen. For simple things you self medicate with paracetamol but if there's something complex you just trust their professional judgement.

We used a technician who was sent along by our builder, which was all part of his 'design and build' service. I didn't need an architect as we had designed the extension and alterations ourselves, although our builder had some useful input and ideas as well. Between us we ended up with something we are very happy with, and it was all within budget. I get very worried (in a vicarious fashion) when I watch programmes like Grand Designs and see architects adding very expensive features like acres of expensive glass, and then the poor clients are scrabbling for money.
From memory the drawings, planning and building regs cost around 3k in total, for a 150k extension and refurb.
I would recommend design and build if you can find a reliable company.

The rates don't sound that crazy. You just had your friend who's a structural engineer doing you a massive favour so that might have skewed your perspective.

Maybe just get a cheap technician to do what you'd like and save £££.

I think the rate sounds absolutely absurd! You dont need much structural work... the structural stuff you can get a structural engineer to write up for a fraction of that price. The architect here is taking ga (huge) cut for arranging routine building control etc.
You do not need a schedule of works for this stuff IMO.

I always get the strong impression that small domestic projects like this are easy money for architects, used to shore up more interesting but less lucrative (for the effort involved) work.