The short answer
The core difference is regulation and title. "Architect" is a legally protected title — only someone registered with the Architects Registration Board (ARB) can use it, and most are also RIBA chartered. They've completed several years of formal training and examination. "Architectural designer" (or "architectural consultant") is not a protected title — there's no register and no legal qualification requirement, so the term covers everyone from highly experienced technicians to people with limited training. Both can legally design your extension or house and produce planning and Building Regulations drawings, because the design work isn't reserved to architects. The practical question is what level of qualification, regulation and design service you want, and whether the difference in fee reflects the difference in what you're getting.
These two terms get used almost interchangeably in adverts, but they mean very different things legally. Knowing the distinction helps you understand exactly who you're hiring and what protections come with it.
Architect vs designer
- ArchitectARB-registered, protected
- DesignerUnregulated term
- Architect trainingFormal, examined
- Both can doPlanning + Building Regs drawings
- Architect feesUsually higher
What 'architect' legally means
"Architect" isn't just a job description — it's a title protected by law under the Architects Act 1997. To use it, a person must be on the ARB register, which requires completing the recognised training route (typically several years of study and practical experience, plus professional examination). Many architects are additionally RIBA chartered, meaning they belong to the Royal Institute of British Architects and follow its code of conduct.
That regulation brings real consequences: a registered architect is accountable to the ARB, must carry professional indemnity insurance, and can be subject to disciplinary action. Misusing the title — calling yourself an architect without being registered — is an offence. So when someone is genuinely an architect, you can verify it on the ARB register.
What an architectural designer is
"Architectural designer" describes what someone does, not a qualification they hold. Because the term is unregulated, it spans a wide range of experience and training. The category often includes:
- Experienced architectural technologists (who may have their own qualifications via CIAT) working under a designer label.
- Skilled technicians and draughtspeople with years of practical experience but no architect registration.
- People earlier in their training, or with less formal background.
Crucially, all of them can legally design buildings and submit planning and Building Regulations applications — the design work is not reserved to architects, only the title is. So an architectural designer can be perfectly capable; you just don't get the same regulatory guarantee that comes with a registered architect, and you should judge them on portfolio, qualifications and references.
| Aspect | Architect | Architectural designer |
|---|---|---|
| Protected title | Yes (ARB) | No |
| Formal qualification required | Yes | No (varies) |
| Regulated / accountable | Yes | No statutory body |
| Can do planning drawings | Yes | Yes |
| Typical fee level | Higher | Lower–mid |
Indicative comparison for guidance only. Sources: ARB and CIAT guidance.
Which should you choose?
Neither is automatically right — it depends on the project and what you value. A reasonable way to decide:
- Choose an architect when you want regulated, accountable expertise, a more design-led service, or you're tackling a complex, bespoke or sensitive project where design judgement matters and the protections of a registered professional reassure you.
- Choose an architectural designer when the project is simpler and standard, you've seen good work in their portfolio, and the lower fee suits the budget — accepting that you're relying on their demonstrated experience rather than a statutory register.
Whoever you pick, check credentials directly: for an architect, look them up on the ARB register; for a designer, ask about qualifications (such as CIAT membership), see completed projects, and take references. The honest bottom line is that both can deliver a successful project — the difference is regulation, training and, often, design depth, and the right choice is the one that matches your project's complexity and your appetite for those assurances.
Frequently asked questions
Can an architectural designer call themselves an architect?
No. "Architect" is a title protected by the ARB under the Architects Act 1997. Using it without being on the ARB register is an offence. That's why unregulated professionals use terms like "architectural designer" or "architectural consultant" instead.
Is an architectural designer cheaper than an architect?
Usually, yes. Without the cost of registration and often with a more functional, less design-led service, designers tend to charge less. Whether that's good value depends on the complexity of your project and the experience of the individual.
How do I check if someone is a real architect?
Search the ARB register, which lists everyone legally entitled to use the title "architect" in the UK. Many architects are also RIBA chartered, which you can confirm through the RIBA. For unregulated designers, check qualifications like CIAT membership and ask to see completed work.
Sources & further reading
- ARB — check the architects register
- CIAT — what is an architectural technologist
- RIBA — working with an architect
Figures on this page are typical UK ranges drawn from published sources and depend on your specific project. They are guidance, not a quotation.