ARB Standard 8 and professional indemnity insurance

Category: Professional regulation · Reviewed by the Apex broking team · Last reviewed 2026-08-22 · ~4 min read

What Standard 8 said

Under the 2017 Architects Code, Standard 8 was headed “Insurance arrangements” and read, in substance: architects are expected to have adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance cover for themselves, their practice and their employees, and to ensure that the insurance remains adequate to meet a claim, maintaining a minimum level of cover, including run-off cover, in accordance with ARB’s guidance (8.1); the need for cover extends to professional work undertaken outside the main practice or employment (8.2); an employed architect should so far as possible ensure that cover or other appropriate indemnity arrangements are provided by the employer (8.3); and, when requested, an architect is expected to provide ARB with evidence of that insurance (8.4).

Those four limbs are worth keeping in view because the current framework carries all of them forward, even though it expresses them differently.

What replaced it, and when

ARB published a new Architects Code — Standards of Conduct and Practice, which came into effect on 1 September 2025 and replaced the 2017 Code. The new Code is principles-based and is organised around six standards: honesty and integrity; public interest; competence; professional practice; communication and collaboration; and respect. It is supported by a series of separate guidance documents rather than by detailed rules inside the Code itself.

Professional indemnity insurance is dealt with in ARB’s standalone PII guidance, which sits under Standard 4 — the requirement that architects carry out their work effectively, exercising skill and diligence, and ensure their liabilities are covered by adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance. In other words, the obligation did not disappear with Standard 8; it moved.

What ARB expects an architect to hold

ARB’s guidance sets a floor rather than a target. It states that ARB would expect a minimum level of indemnity of £250,000, and that insurance should be acquired on an each and every claim basis rather than in the aggregate. The guidance is explicit that this is a minimum: architects are expected to take advice on what limit is appropriate to the value, complexity and risk profile of the work they actually do, and for most practices doing building work the appropriate figure is materially higher than the floor.

The each-and-every-claim point is easy to skim past and expensive to get wrong. An aggregate limit is exhausted by the total of claims in a period; an each and every claim limit restores for each separate claim, subject to any aggregation language in the wording. Where a wording aggregates claims arising from a single source or original cause, several project claims can collapse into one, which is why the aggregation clause deserves as much attention as the limit.

Run-off cover

ARB’s guidance expects an architect who ceases practice to maintain a minimum of six years of run-off cover — five years if practising in Scotland, reflecting the shorter prescriptive period there — at the same level as the last year before cessation. Because professional indemnity is written on a claims-made basis, a policy that has lapsed does not respond to a claim made after lapse, however long ago the work was done. Run-off is not an optional courtesy to former clients; it is what keeps the cover meaningful.

Six years reflects the ordinary contractual limitation period, not the outer limit of exposure. Deeds run for twelve years, and building safety legislation has extended certain retrospective and prospective periods well beyond six, so the guidance floor should be treated as a minimum and not as a risk assessment.

Work outside the main practice, and employed architects

The old Standard 8.2 point survives: cover must extend to professional work done outside the main practice or employment. An architect who takes on private work at weekends, sits on a design review panel, or acts as an expert witness needs to be sure something responds. ARB’s guidance accepts that an architect working through an agency or as a consultant may not need a personal policy where appropriate cover is provided on their behalf — but expects written confirmation of that cover rather than an assumption.

Employed architects should satisfy themselves that the employer has cover in place. ARB is clear that it remains the individual architect’s professional responsibility to ensure their professional work is adequately covered, which is not the same as it being the employer’s administrative problem.

If cover is not available

The guidance recognises that some architects will face exclusions they cannot remove — fire safety and cladding exclusions being the obvious current example — or, in rare cases, will be unable to obtain cover at all. The expectation is that the architect takes all reasonable steps to remove or narrow the limitation at each renewal, keeps a record of having done so, and writes to ARB to explain the circumstances where cover is absent. Accepting a restriction quietly and saying nothing is the position ARB is least likely to accept.

For a practice in that position, the practical work is evidential: a documented market exercise at each renewal, a note of which insurers were approached and what they said, and a clear record of the client disclosures made about the restriction.

Why it matters

Registration depends on it. An architect who cannot demonstrate adequate and appropriate cover when ARB asks is exposed to a professional conduct issue quite separate from any underlying negligence claim. And because the Code changed in September 2025, guidance, checklists and practice notes written before that date — including anything that speaks of “Standard 8” as current — should be treated as historical and checked against ARB’s published PII guidance.

Frequently asked questions

Does ARB Standard 8 still exist?

Not as current regulation. Standard 8 was the insurance standard of the 2017 Architects Code, which was replaced on 1 September 2025 by the Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice. The insurance obligation now sits under Standard 4 of the new Code and in ARB's separate PII guidance.

What is the minimum PI limit ARB expects?

ARB's PII guidance states it would expect a minimum level of indemnity of £250,000, acquired on an each and every claim basis. That is a floor, not a recommendation: architects are expected to assess what limit is appropriate to the value and risk of the work they do.

How much run-off cover does ARB expect?

A minimum of six years' run-off after ceasing practice, or five years in Scotland, at the same level as the final year of practice. Longer periods are often appropriate where obligations were assumed by deed or where building safety legislation extends the exposure.

What should I do if I cannot get cover without an exclusion?

Take and document all reasonable steps to remove the limitation at each renewal, keep a record of the market exercise, and write to ARB explaining the circumstances. ARB's guidance anticipates this situation; what it does not anticipate is silence.

References

• ARB, Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice
• ARB, Professional Indemnity Insurance guidance (PDF)
• ARB, PII guidance for architects

Related entries

• Arb code of conduct pii architects uk guide
• Arb and pi insurance what the architects code requires
• Arb pii minimum limit architects uk
• Arb pii run off cover architects uk guide
• Arb standard 8 self check
• Architects pi insurance uk guide 2026

This entry is part of the Apex Insurance Wiki. It is general insurance information, not legal advice, and states the position as at August 2026. Last reviewed 2026-08-22. Next review: 2027-02-22. Always read the policy wording and take advice on your own facts.

Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN 724952). This page is general information, not advice on a specific policy.