The National Ethics
Council (NEC) has ruled that Duncan T. Todd, AIA, violated Rules 4.101
and 4.201 of the Institute’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
(Code of Ethics), as those provisions read before the Code’s revision
in 1997:
Rule 4.101 Members shall comply with the registration laws and regulations
governing their professional practice.
Rule 4.201 Members shall not make misleading, deceptive, or false statements
or claims about their professional qualifications, experience, or performance.
The NEC found no violation by Todd of Rule 4.202, which before 1997 required
AIA members to “make reasonable efforts to ensure that those over
whom they have supervisory authority conform their conduct to this Code.”
The case against Todd was initiated with the NEC in 1996, but held in
abeyance pending proceedings by the California Board of Architectural
Examiners (CBAE). In 1999, the CBAE concluded that Todd had violated California
law by holding himself out to the public as an architect without being
licensed in California. In doing so, the CBAE found that Todd had become
the principal of a California firm in January 1993, but had not become
licensed in California until March 1994. In the meantime, the following
events occurred:
• In March 1993, in a statement of qualifications for work at various
U.S. Army installations, Todd’s firm included his resumé
showing him as “Design Architect.”
• Later, in March 1993, the firm made a presentation to a school
district, including Todd’s resumé on letterhead identifying
him as “Duncan T. Todd, Architect.”
• In June 1993, the firm sent materials to another school district,
again with a resumé bearing the heading or letterhead of “Duncan
T. Todd, Architect.”
• In October 1993, the firm submitted a proposal to another local
school district, designating Todd as “Partner in Charge and Project
Architect” for the proposed project.
• In December 1993, the firm issued another statement of qualifications
to the Army, identifying Todd as “Design Architect.”
The CBAE issued a citation and levied a fine against Todd for his violation
of California law.
The NEC held that the CBAE citation, based on Todd’s holding himself
out as an architect without being licensed in California, was sufficient
in itself to establish a violation of Rule 4.101 of the pre-1997 Code
of Ethics. In addition, misstatements to third parties concerning Todd’s
education and license status were found to violate Rule 4.201, but this
violation was considered secondary and was not treated as distinct from
the violation of Rule 4.101 for purposes of imposing discipline.
In determining the appropriate penalty in this case, the NEC noted that
Todd had knowingly violated California’s licensing laws repeatedly
over a period of a year and added that Todd had a particular responsibility,
as a principal of his firm, to present accurately his qualifications and
those of his firm. It also noted, however, that Todd had complied with
the CBAE order and made policy changes within his firm to ensure that
the firm’s proposals would be accurate in the future. Taking these
various factors into account, the NEC imposed the penalty of censure.
This publication is provided pursuant to Section 8.32 of the Institute’s
Bylaws.
Copyright 2003 The American Institute of Architects.
All rights reserved.
|