Most published guidance on architect professional indemnity insurance assumes the reader is a RIBA member with access to the RIBA insurance scheme route. In practice a large share of practising UK architects are not RIBA members. They are ARB-registered — because ARB registration is the statutory requirement to use the title Architect — but have chosen not to join, not to renew, or came into the profession through a route that never brought them into RIBA membership. Their regulator obligations are identical to any other architect's. Their placement route is not.
This page sets out how the market looks from a non-RIBA architect's point of view, what ARB requires under Standard 8, how the Building Safety Act 2022 has changed the underwriting picture, and where a specialist broker fits.
You are the intended reader if you are an ARB-registered architect who is not currently a RIBA member. That includes sole practitioners who never joined; small practices where none of the principals holds RIBA membership; architects who resigned or did not renew their membership after qualification; and architects who reached ARB registration through the Prescribed Examination or an equivalent route rather than through a RIBA-validated course. It also covers architects whose practice sits outside the RIBA scheme's appetite — for example, those with meaningful historical involvement in higher-risk buildings, or those working almost entirely in consulting or expert-witness roles.
If you are still a RIBA member the scheme route may well be the right place to start; this page is not a comparison of scheme against non-scheme cover on price or feature. It is a description of the ground the non-RIBA architect stands on when placing cover.
The Architects Registration Board is the statutory regulator, created under the Architects Act 1997. It is the body that maintains the Register of Architects, that sets the Architects Code of Standards of Conduct and Practice, and that can investigate and sanction misconduct. To hold yourself out as an Architect in the United Kingdom you must appear on the ARB Register. That is a matter of law, not of professional preference.
The Royal Institute of British Architects is a professional membership body. It runs its own conduct code, offers education, publishes contracts and guidance, and administers benefits — including access to an insurance scheme route for members. Membership is voluntary. You can be an ARB-registered architect and never once have applied to join RIBA; you can leave RIBA at any point and remain fully entitled to practise.
The distinction matters here because insurance obligations under the Architects Code sit with ARB, not with RIBA. Nothing about being outside the RIBA scheme changes what ARB expects. Nothing about being outside the RIBA scheme reduces your exposure under the Defective Premises Act, the Building Safety Act, or a client's contract. The regulator sees an ARB-registered practitioner; the client sees an architect. RIBA membership is a badge, not a statutory qualifier.
Standard 8 of the Architects Code requires architects not to undertake professional work without adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance cover. The ARB's revised Code and PII guidance took effect on 1 September 2025, retaining that language as the operative standard with more detailed expectations in the PII guidance.
The standard is qualitative. Adequacy and appropriateness are judged against the size and nature of the practice, the work type, the contract obligations accepted, and the severity of claims that could realistically arise. ARB does publish an expected minimum indemnity — currently £250,000 each and every claim — but that figure is a floor, not the answer. A residential practice writing high-value contracts, a practice with higher-risk-building involvement, or one contracted on collateral warranties for developers is unlikely to be treating £250,000 as adequate on any reasoned analysis.
Practitioners are expected to justify their choice of limit if challenged. That means keeping a note of how the figure was reached — what the practice does, what the largest reasonable claim looks like, what contracts require — rather than defaulting to whatever number was on last year's schedule.
Standard 8 also carries a run-off expectation. When a practice ceases, the professional exposure does not. ARB does not mandate a fixed term but expects appropriate provision on cessation; industry practice sits at six years as a working baseline, longer where the work profile justifies it.
Section 135 of the Building Safety Act 2022 rewrote the limitation landscape for claims that involve dwellings unfit for habitation. It amended the Defective Premises Act 1972 so that the limitation period for a section 1 claim is extended to 30 years for work already completed before the section came into force on 28 June 2022, and to 15 years for work completed after that date.
That is not a niche point. Section 1 of the Defective Premises Act reaches architects who took on work in connection with the provision of a dwelling. The extended limitation period applies retrospectively to work long since delivered. It is not confined to higher-risk buildings, though the higher-risk-building regime introduced by the same Act — broadly, residential buildings of at least 18 metres or seven storeys with at least two residential units — draws the sharpest underwriting attention.
For placement, three consequences follow.
Insurers now underwrite architects' practices with an eye on history that would previously have been outside limitation. A residential project from the late 1990s could give rise to a section 1 claim today. Underwriters ask about past involvement in cladding, external wall systems, means of escape, and residential design, and read the answers carefully.
Retroactive dates matter more than they did. PI is written on a claims-made basis; a policy responds to a claim first made during the period of insurance, provided the underlying work falls after the retroactive date. If your retroactive date has been narrowed at a past renewal, the extended limitation period increases the chance that a valid claim falls outside cover.
Market appetite for higher-risk-building exposure has narrowed. Some insurers have withdrawn from architects with meaningful HRB involvement; others impose sub-limits or exclusions specific to fire-safety and cladding. A non-RIBA architect on the open market needs someone who knows which insurers still have appetite for their profile and can move a submission between markets without breaking the retroactive position.
None of this treats non-RIBA architects any differently from RIBA members. The regulator does not, and the Building Safety Act does not. RIBA membership does not change the underlying obligation.
The RIBA insurance scheme route is a market fact. It is available to eligible RIBA members and is the default placement for a large part of the profession. For a non-RIBA architect that route is not open, and the placement question becomes a matter of accessing insurer capacity through a broker.
A specialist broker with architect PI depth places cover across the range of insurers whose appetite fits the practice — commercial market carriers, Lloyd's-backed facilities, and specialist professional risks underwriters. Apex Insurance Brokers describes its placement as whole-of-market for architect PI, which is a factual description of how the broker sources capacity rather than a comparison against any other route.
The value of specialist placement for a non-RIBA architect is less about price and more about fit. Underwriters differ on how they treat historical higher-risk-building involvement; on whether they insist on higher deductibles for residential exposure; on retroactive-date position at renewal; on the treatment of collateral warranties and net contribution clauses; and on run-off pricing when the practice winds down. A submission that lands at the right insurer, in the right form, tends to price and terms better than one that has been shopped indiscriminately.
Several practice profiles come up repeatedly.
Sole practitioners doing residential work. An ARB-registered architect running a small residential practice with new-build houses, extensions, and listed-building consents. Aggregation of small claims and retroactive-date discipline matter.
Small partnerships doing commercial fit-out. A limited company or LLP working with commercial developers, retail brands, or hospitality clients. Contract review — indemnity size, net contribution clauses, additional insureds — drives the placement conversation.
Architects doing conservation or specialist restoration. Practices working on listed buildings, heritage assets, or ecclesiastical projects. Insurer appetite differs, and the technical depth of the practice matters.
Architects with historical higher-risk-building involvement. A partner-in-charge on a residential tower in the 2000s; a director who signed off cladding drawings on a mid-rise scheme. Section 135 makes that history live, and placement is a specialist exercise.
Architects transitioning to consulting only. Practitioners who have stopped design work and moved to expert witness, planning consultancy, or client-side advisory. Cover needs to reflect current work and the run-off tail from prior design work.
Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is an FCA-authorised general insurance intermediary (firm reference number 724952) with a specialism in professional indemnity for regulated professions. The firm is director-led — Matt Bartlett holds SMF3, SMF16 and SMF17 approvals — so accountability sits on a named individual.
The published guidance library on this site covers the regulator mechanics that shape architect placement: ARB Standard 8, the Architects Code, and the Building Safety Act 2022 section 135. That depth is how submissions are written, retroactive-date decisions documented, and run-off planned. Placement is whole-of-market across insurers with architect appetite, on standard architect PI wordings rather than scheme-specific paper.
No. RIBA membership is voluntary. The statutory obligation to hold professional indemnity insurance sits under the ARB Code, which applies to every architect on the ARB Register regardless of RIBA affiliation. Non-RIBA architects place cover on the open market through a broker with architect PI capacity.
Standard 8 of the Architects Code requires you not to undertake professional work without adequate and appropriate professional indemnity insurance cover. ARB's PII guidance sets an expected minimum indemnity of £250,000 each and every claim, but the operative standard is adequacy — judged against the size and nature of the practice, the work type, the contract obligations you take on, and the severity of claims that could realistically arise. Practitioners should be able to justify their choice of limit if challenged.
The £250,000 ARB expected minimum is a floor, not the answer for most practices. The right limit is driven by the size of typical fees, the value and complexity of the projects delivered, the wording of client contracts and collateral warranties, whether the work involves residential or higher-risk buildings, and the practice's claims history. A specialist broker will work through those inputs and document the limit choice so that the reasoning is available if ARB or an insurer asks about it.
Yes. Section 135 of the Act extended the limitation period for claims under section 1 of the Defective Premises Act 1972 — to 30 years for work already completed by 28 June 2022 and to 15 years for work completed after that date. That reaches back over decades of design work in some practices. Insurers now underwrite architect PI with that extended limitation in mind, look closely at any involvement in higher-risk buildings, and treat retroactive-date decisions with more care than they used to.
Your ARB obligations do not change. Standard 8 continues to apply, adequate and appropriate cover remains a professional duty, and any run-off arrangements you had planned still need to be in place if you cease practice. If you were placing cover through the RIBA scheme route, you will need to move to open-market placement at your next renewal. That transition is straightforward through a specialist broker; the key point is to protect the retroactive date so that historical work remains within the new policy's scope.
The RIBA scheme route offers eligible members access to a specific insurance facility administered on behalf of the Institute. Non-scheme placement uses standard architect PI wordings from insurers with appetite for the risk, sourced across the market by a broker. The cover types are the same in structure — claims-made, retroactive-date sensitive, subject to the usual PI exclusions — but the placement route, the underwriting relationships, and the ability to move markets over successive renewals differ. Neither route is a substitute for adequate and appropriate cover under Standard 8; both are ways of getting there.
For the wider picture on architect PI and the specific mechanics referenced here, see:
Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Firm reference number 724952.