There seems to be a gulf of misunderstanding between the architectural profession and clients. It is clear to (good) architects that a good architect will transform any project and the cost of that service will bring enormous value to the client. However, there any many non-professionals who haven't trained for 7 years that are all too willing to offer a service which is perceived by the public as being very similar only at a lower cost - unfortunately this couldn't be further from the truth. A builder won't help you as he is likely to be looking at any project from his commercial perspective and anyway he is unlikely to have any design training. A technical service will be able to produce plans, but not architecture or great design, therefore a good architect is the obvious solution. However, selection of the right architect is just as important as we do not all do the same thing; it is most important to find someone whose work matches your style and that you can build a great working relationship with, rather than an architect who gives the lowest quote. We do not do this type of project, but concentrate on complete new homes - especially paragraph 55 homes. I hope that this advice is of use and that you find a great architect to work with.

Thank you all for taking the time to provide the comments. I wanted to take the time to read and consider before responding further. And all very valid points. 1. When we met with our now architects and others we considered, our brief strongly emphasised the need to meet the budget and solutions/plans/layout to meet our current lifestyle as a family. 2. Interior design was a bonus as the now architects differentiated themselves as a firm that offered both services and the fee/package reflected and included for both. 3. In terms of 3D rendering, it is indeed our lack of experience resulting us believing all firms provide the same output -ie drawings, models etc etc etc, which we now understand is not the case, but OK. 4. Taking matters in our own hands - there were many attempts at stage 1 and 2 when we flagged to them about the costs/budget not being met from what has been proposed. We were told, wait for the cost analysis. We did. The cost analysis came back at double the budget. We were told, wait, they would strip out the furnishes from the cost analysis and a separate FFE schedule would show the breakdown between the build and the fixtures and furnishings. We did. The FFE schedule came back even higher after the architects provided the details of the furnishes they proposed. Again, we flagged not just from a cost perspective but also the colour palette/scheme was not to the initial mood imagery they had provided and the materials were not practical for us as a family. Another example - we went to the supplier for the carpet they had proposed to have a look in person. The supplier said to us straight away he would not have recommended that carpet to anyone who has a pet and/or kids. And immediately said the product is popular from an aesthetic point but for us, it would not be practical at all and we would regret it. We have also flagged this to the architects, ie the proposed items require some level of functionality and practicality to suit this particular client ie us, a young family. 5. Changing the kitchen layout - we did everything we could to avoid changing the layout therefore we spoke to the gas engineers at the recommendation of the architects. In fact we feel that now having changed the layout, we ourselves have compromised on what we really wanted ie the first design we had selected. We were effectively told by the gas engineers that the layout was never going to work unless we did not have a boiler in the kitchen OR we end up with a floor boiler, which was pointless, as it was more expensive and wouldn't give us a better flow rate as it was the mains rather than the boiler that would affect in our case. And people who go the floor boiler mainly do us to achieve better flow rate or capacity. Whereas if we ended up with a floor boiler, it would purely be to force the layout to achieve. Plus, it defeats us moving the washing machine out of the kitchen to another room in the first place if we end up with a floor boiler. And finally, not only ending up with a floor boiler in order to make the original layout work, we would also have ended up with a stove at the kitchen island (initial design was a sink), which was also all along we told the architects, not something we would at all consider due to a young child. So therefore, the proposed solutions in order to keep to the original layout would not suit us. 6. Maybe we are asking for too much but we gave an itemised brief to the now and all the architects we initially met with as to what we wanted to cover for each and every part of the space. We have constantly referred back to the brief to ask what about this? has this been factored in? what about that? 7. In all our correspondences, we have taken care to explain where we are coming from and use a collaborative tone. The only one time when we really pushed back was on the kitchen layout and expressing our disappointment that we had to end up changing the kitchen layout because the boiler placement was not given due consideration prior to coming up with the layout. 8. Finally, of course we have lost some faith in the architects but we are all about moving forward and wanting to maintain their engagement and commitment to the project to the end which we are finding tricky. For instance, the hard part in getting them to see that us proposing alternatives or not wanting to go with the proposed furnishes for e.g. is not dissing their taste but is us thinking the big picture of getting the project done aligned to the budget and scope (again, suitable for a family). In ANY type of project management, budgeting is an integral aspect we would have thought? We were told "we don't project manage" by the architects which is also why we are now spending our time to do this ourselves and having paid for services which we feel have not been met (like selling meat to a vegan).

Hi Emily, I do see your dilemma and you are right to be cautious. I see this situation with clients all the time. FEES I have been designing for 30 years and still find it difficult to discuss fees so I tend to get it out of the way as soon as possible. I don't charge for the first visit, its for me to see and understand the job and for the client to meet me and see if they like my ideas. (Never underestimate your gut feelings when you meet an architect/designer, the working relationship is crucial.) I put in a fixed fee in writing immediately after the meeting, if the client sees value in my fee I get the job, if they don't they have had the benefit of my advice and they can keep looking for the right person. This is the nature of the business. ARCHITECT OR INTERIOR DESIGNER This is more difficult than it sounds. Ideally you need an interior architect, ie someone that understands interiors and has the knowledge to design the building around an agreed interior theme allowing for layout, lighting and aesthetic. (or an architectural practice that has an in-house interior designer) Always ask to see their portfolio to ensure their work is to the standard you expect and that their style is suitable for your taste. If they can't show you this don't use them. Always ask if they can illustrate their ideas, sounds obvious but its important. Any extension or building alteration is a big investment for the client and as such the client should be in a position where they can see and understand exactly what is being suggested. Plans and elevations are great for technical solutions but this should be backed up with a 3D model so you can see the extension in relation to the house and also see the interior space with furniture so you can understand the layout, style and light quality. SUMMARY Employ someone you like and have confidence in. See samples of their work. Agree a fee you're comfortable with from day one. Hope that helps. Regards, Martin www.angel-martin.com

We had a 'planning consultant' he was about a fifth of the cost of the architect, as to be fair we knew exactly what we wanted, just needed to know how to get there. They say they offer:- Architectural plans for planning permission • Architectural plans for building regulations • Architectural plans for listed building consent • Sectional drawings of fenestration • Design and access statements • Justification statements • Landscaping plans We paid him for drawings, I think he employed a structural engineer for the steels calcs, we have 13 steels in the house now, as we took a lot of walls out and converted the loft (was a bungalow) Hope this helps, Julie