A Disciplinary Board was convened on 14 December 2022, comprising of: Mr Murray Armes, Mr David Dibb-Fuller FIStructE, Mr Simon Pole FIStructE with Mr Philip Newman Barrister of Law and Ralph Shipway, solicitor, as legal adviser, in respect of matters referred to it by the Professional Conduct Committee.
The matters arose in respect of the engagement of Mr Andrew Dust CEng MIStructE in a project, as the adjoining property owner’s Party Wall Surveyor in accordance with the Party Wall Etc Act 1996 (“the Act”).
The complaint alleged that Mr. Dust acted unethically and unprofessionally with the intention of generating excessive fees for himself.
In the premises, taking all matters into account, the Board found the complaint proven and that Mr Dust was in breach of Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Institution’s Code of Conduct. In particular the Board found that Mr Dust’s Letter of Appointment was unfair and misleading; factually inaccurate, unethical and outside the spirit of the Act.
The Board considered submissions on mitigation, and, on 3 March 2023 imposed the sanction of Severe Reprimand and directed Mr Dust to give an Undertaking to amend his method of appointment and remuneration for Party Wall Surveying instructions such that they are in accordance with the Act and with established best practice guidance. Mr Dust must further undertake to routinely provide detailed time sheets annotated with activities in order to allow for the open and transparent assessment of reasonable fees by the Building Owner’s Surveyor.
In accordance with Rule 9 of the Procedural Rules of the Disciplinary Board, Mr Dust lodged an Appeal against the Disciplinary Board’s Decision.
An Appeal Tribunal was convened on 20 November 2023 comprising of: The Rt Hon. Sir Gary Hickinbottom (Appeal Tribunal Chair), Mr. Sean Gibbs PG Dip Arb LLM FICE FCIOB FRICS FCIARB and Professor Donald McQuillan CEng FIStructE FCIHT FIAE FICE FIEI FConsE MAE MAPM.
The Appeal Tribunal did not find that any of the submissions made on behalf of Mr Dust’s appeal made good, consequently the Tribunal dismissed the appeal and made an award of costs against Mr Dust.