Name: Arbtech
Address: 3 Well House Barns, Chester Road, Bretton, Chester
Rating: 4.77

“I would strongly advise against using Arbtech. My experience has been highly unprofessional and feels like a predatory approach to billing. After an initial survey, Arbtech strongly pressured me to book a second, highly expensive "rapid" Bat Emergence and Re-Entry Survey (BERS). They insisted that if this wasn't completed immediately, I would be forced to wait 12 months due to the survey season constraints, which effectively coerced me into signing up for a service I was not convinced I needed. It turns out that the local authority was perfectly satisfied with the first survey; planning permission was granted without requiring this second costly exercise. As soon as I realized the survey was unnecessary, I cancelled it before the scheduled visit—and before any work had actually commenced. Despite this, I was hit with a cancellation invoice of over £2,200. It feels completely unreasonable to push clients into expensive, unnecessary services under the guise of urgency and then penalize them for cancelling when it becomes clear the work is not required. I am now being threatened with legal action for an "abortive" fee for a job that was never even started. Think twice before signing any contracts with them.”

Helpful Report

Posted 1 week ago

We are very sorry to hear that you feel your experience with Arbtech was unsatisfactory. We take feedback of this nature seriously. Our recommendations are based on the information available to us at the time, including the potential requirements of the relevant planning authority and the seasonal constraints associated with bat surveys. Where further survey work is recommended, this is intended to help our clients make informed decisions and minimise the risk of delays or additional requirements later in the planning process. We appreciate that circumstances can change as a planning application progresses, and we understand that this can be frustrating, particularly where a recommended survey subsequently turns out not to be required by the local authority. Cancellation arrangements and any associated fees are governed by the terms that have been signed and agreed when a service is instructed. In this case, you cancelled the survey very late, once a surveyor had already been appointed and scheduled to do the work so a fee of 50% of the survey was charged, as the terms state. That said, we are disappointed that you feel you were pressured into commissioning services and that the process left you with this impression. We would welcome the opportunity to review the circumstances of your case with you directly and address any concerns you may have regarding the advice provided, the cancellation and the associated charges.

Posted 2 days ago

“I definitely do not recommend using Arbtech…… Had Arbtech surveyor out for a PRA on roof that needs replacing. Next thing is some supervisor is emailing me saying: I will have to have 3 surveys between May–Sept, that I will need to report to police and get a crime reference number if any repair works to be carried out and that Arbtech will need to project manage any works. Very different to the conversations I was having with the actual surveyor. Begrudgingly, I paid the £600 fee just to get rid of them as all of a sudden I had most of the company emailing me regarding payment and terms and conditions. Just had another PRA carried out by an experienced independent surveyor. As expected….. no bats, no evidence of bats, next to zero chance bats would choose to roost in my roof in its current condition and no further bat surveys required. To me, Arbtech feels like a corporate money making machine which is a little bit shady.”

Helpful Report

Posted 2 weeks ago

“I used Arbtech (Invoice: 98141) for a Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment for £1,306.80. The surveyor found zero physical evidence of bats (no droppings, no staining) during a 3-hour daytime visit. Despite this, Arbtech used it as an opportunity to hit me with an astronomical quote of £28,726.80 for Phase 2 surveys. To show how predatory this pricing is, I hired an independent, fully qualified ecologist to do the exact same required Phase 2 work for £3,924 inc. VAT. I sent a formal complaint under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 requesting a reasonable 50% partial refund because of this exploitative behavior. Arbtech has completely ignored my emails and past deadlines. Disgraceful bait-and-switch tactics. Avoid this company and get alternative quotes."”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 months ago

Hi Graham I've reviewed your file in detail. The initial survey does not need to find physical evidence of bats for more surveys to be required. Your site clearly had a lot of roosting potential and clearly needed follow on surveys to satisfy requirements from your LPA. The follow on quote is not used by us as an ‘opportunity’ to hit you with more fees. This is something we get accused of frequently because some clients simply don’t want to accept more surveys, more costs, and potential delays. This is understandable but anything we recommend is done to satisfy requirements from the LPA so that you can get planning. Whatever we recommend is the fastest, more straight forward way to achieve your aims. You decided to stop working with us and lodge a complaint. Honestly, the grounds of your complaint are completely unwarranted and seem to stem from the price of the follow on BERS quote. The price you claim we stated in your review is for our expediated service which is more expensive. The baseline price is significantly cheaper but you did not mention this. We also quoted for multiple visits to the site requiring many consultants. The quote you are comparing us to only seems to cover one visit with far fewer consultants on the site. Whether the alternative quote would be sufficient to satisfy your LPA is unknown but you are free to choose any consultancy you want for follow on work. It would not benefit us at all to inflate our prices as you seem to suggest. We quote for what is needed to satisfy your LPA. Whichever consultancy you choose for the follow on work you need, we wish you all the best with your project.

Posted 2 days ago

“My experience with Arbtech has been extremely disappointing. Avoid this company! I paid £580 for what I understood would be a comprehensive bat survey to support a planning application. After the PRA I was informed that a separate endoscope survey would be required at an additional cost of approximately £900 + VAT. This was not what was clearly written on the PRA advert or indeed the terms of booking form - ‘high powered torches and endoscopes WILL BE USED’. They will not, they will seek to charge you extra afterwards. When I raised concerns about this and sought to dispute the charge through my credit card provider, Arbtech’s response was not to address my concerns in a constructive way, but instead to repeatedly threaten legal action, court proceedings, debt recovery and a potential CCJ, suggesting they would simply “issue a CCJ” . As a customer, I found this intimidating and wholly disproportionate, particularly given that I was simply exercising my right to challenge a payment for a service I believed had been misrepresented. What made matters worse was the tone of the correspondence. Rather than acknowledging that there was a genuine disagreement about what had been sold and delivered, I was repeatedly told that I would face legal consequences if I continued with the dispute. The focus appeared to be on pressuring me into abandoning my complaint rather than resolving it. I have never experienced a company react so aggressively to a customer raising a legitimate concern. Regardless of who is ultimately found to be right in the dispute process, customers should be able to question a service and pursue a chargeback without being subjected to repeated threats of litigation. The way this matter has been handled has completely destroyed my confidence in the company. Based on my experience, I would strongly advise anyone considering Arbtech to read every document carefully, ensure they fully understand exactly what is and is not included in the service, and be prepared for a very confrontational response if any disagreement arises. I very much look forward to seeing this matter through in Court, if that’s what Arbtech so wish, as they don’t have a leg to stand on, as per my legal advice. The only person who can’t see this is their ‘Finance Director’. I have never dealt with such a rude and ignorant man, an employee who is supposed to be representing a company! I’ve never known a company to provide such bad customer service, and not be prepared to put things right in regard to a genuine complaint from a customer. This could have all been resolved with mutual agreement to re-attend and conduct the endoscope survey free of charge as per their terms, but I have had to go to an alternative firm and pay another fee. Not a good way to run a business.”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 months ago

Hi Dan It is a shame it has come to this. This issue could have been dealt with easily. Our consultant has explained in detail why the surveys were done as they were and why endoscopes were not needed on the initial survey. You chose to issue a chargeback for the work done even though you have no basis to do so. As a company, we must follow up on situations when someone refuses to pay us for work done. We’d much rather resolve the issue without legal action. Here’s a quick summary of your issues regarding the endoscope use that you believe we should have used: We did not need to use an endoscope for this survey – it would have been irrelevant. The initial survey was to see if the development had roosting potential. If we used an endoscope on this initial survey - we would still recommend an endoscope survey be done again during a pre-commencement inspection. This is because there is no way to know if bats had started roosting on the site after the initial survey and prior to works starting. This dispute seems to stem from this misunderstanding as well as our website saying that an endoscope would be used. Clearly it is of no benefit to you or us to use an endoscope when it wasn't required, as the pre-commencement inspection would still be needed either way. Best regards

Posted 3 months ago

“I work in the building design sector so often deal with consultants. This companies fees are off the charts. Found an alternative for my Bat survey and licence work that was almost a a tenth of that quoted by Arbtech. They may be good but not worth 10 times the cost. I asked for breakdown of how the costs were calculated but this is something they do not do. They do claim to competitive which I would disagree with. Extortionate would be more accurate.”

Helpful Report

Posted 1 year ago

“Unfortunately, I had a very bad experience with Arbtech and regret appointing them for my planning permission requirements. Initially, they seemed competent, and I was naïve. However, things started to unravel with numerous mistakes and an excessive focus on extreme caution to drive up both surveys and costs. They included neighbouring trees (up to 10m outside my demise) in my BNG calculation and wanted to install badger cameras on neighbouring land (300 meters away) on Network Rail land. The Badger Trust confirmed that this was unnecessary, as the setts were not on our development land. Scary tactics. There were several other issues, and I am still waiting for one report, with no refunds being offered. They never admit fault, never seem to genuinely help, and appear solely focused on extracting as much money as possible from clients. Be warned: Ecology is the wild west. Use only ecologists registered with CIEEM! This is not just my advice; this is the advice from the BADGER TRUST – IDEALLY USE AN ECOLOIST THAT IS CIEEM REGISTERED!!! Most of the Arbtech ecologists are not registered, and those that are have registered complaints against them. see further below. I have no doubt Arbtech will dispute my points as they are never wrong. There is a reason the badger trust advise developers to use CIEEM registered ecologists. Arbtech don’t seem to like the CIEEM and even penned an open letter... Ask yourself why - do they catch them cheating? All the subsequent ecologists I have spoken to have often been appointed after Arbtech have tried it on with clients. “another Arbtech clean up job”. Once you do find a decent ecologists everything will be a lot easier, practical, amicable, logical and enjoyable with a good result for your project and the environment. Upon even more digging, like a badger... it would seem that CIEEM have to deal with a lot of complaints about Arbtech. see https://cieem.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/InPractice87_March2015.pdf So there we go - another 5 star review.”

Helpful Report

Posted 2 years ago

“Poor poor service, report withheld for two months when claim contested. In summary our brief documented on an email was a bat assessment for house and building area and the outbuilding wasn’t surveyed. When asking for a reduction on the bill for the part that wasn’t surveyed this was refused. It took two months.. The explanation was that they took house and building to mean house and gardens. (If we had meant gardens we would have written gardens not building.) After several civil correspondences this was the reply. “This has been thoroughly investigated, and we have nothing further to add. We surveyed what we were told to survey. We will not be commenting further.” The cost of the assessment was a £1000 and I just think this treatment is wrong, to be cut dead. When escalated to the chief exec whose profile says that his specialist area is “exemplary customer service” this got passed to the Office manager at a second prompt. On the day of talking to the office manager we received a final demand for the invoice "before being sent to a debt collectors" . Apparently this was a mix up but intimidating nonetheless. Again the CEO subsequently refused to offer a discount. They did offer to come and survey the outbuilding FOC. but after 2 months , no report , umpteen calls, 20 plus emails and texts I’m done. All I wanted was money off for the area that wasn’t surveyed. I think that is fair, you can decide for yourself . Seeing that the last official correspondence are threatening to go to debt collection if I do not pay then I have no option but to pay, as I can not afford the legal fees to contest it. And of course they don’t issue the report unless you pay up. It reminds me of parking tickets, the price of contesting it is just too high and therefore you ultimately back down. You can make your own mind up as to whether you would use them or not, this was so easy to avoid. All I wanted was money back for the area that wasn’t surveyed. Not unreasonable? This is an expensive assessment of £1000 for an initial assessment and for the sake of £100 or so , this is what they consider to be "exemplary service" . Ps Clare. Was the last person we spoke to and was very polite but was unable to change the CEO’s mind who said that was his final offer.”

Helpful Report

Posted 2 years ago

I'm sorry that you were unhappy with our service Chris. This all stems from the fact that the buildings you claim were missed in our survey were not on the plans you showed us. We surveyed what was on the plan and quoted according to that plan. When you raised your concern, we offered to come back and add the other buildings but you did not accept this, hence why your report was not released. Reports are not sent on accounts with outstanding invoices.

Posted 2 years ago

“I had a disappointing experience with Arbtech. Despite initially booking a Pat survey through their website, I encountered several issues throughout the process. The service was subpar, with the surveyor lacking professionalism. Additionally, I was shocked to discover hidden costs, as I was pressured into purchasing unnecessary additional surveys at exorbitant prices. It's worth noting that Arbtech wanted me to do two extra surveys, whereas I found another reputable company that completed the job for less and without requesting additional surveys. When I attempted to address my concerns with the company, I was met with dismissiveness and threats of legal action. Overall, I cannot recommend Arbtech due to their poor communication, unprofessionalism, and unethical business practices.”

Helpful Report

Posted 2 years ago

We appreciate that you're disappointed with needing extra surveys. Nobody likes extra costs, but accusing us of a subpar service, being unprofessional and being unethical simply because you don't want to pay your invoice is unfair. Our surveys were carried out to our usual high standards with our surveyor correctly identifying many potential bat roost sites. Her findings were confirmed by one of our senior consultants and we went to great lengths to explain all of this to you. There is no pressure applied from us - we simply give you what you paid us for - our professional opinion of the surveys you need to get done in order for your planning to get consent.

Posted 2 years ago

“This is the worst company we have dealt with. They charged us a Rapid Report fee and when the survey was booked and paid for, they told us Rapid fee only covers quick survey. After more than 3 weeks, we still have not received the report. What a crooked practice that is- Dave”

Helpful Report

Posted 2 years ago

“Planning orientated and not very practical when it comes to dealing with fast-moving refurbishment projects. The preliminary Roost assessment didn't tell us anything we didn't already know and costs were misleading. All we wanted was a clear answer on whether a bat roost was present. The project was delayed by a month when there were no bats present. A more practical surveyor was able to conduct very quick emergence surveys to give us an almost instant answer allowing our project to proceed!”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 years ago

Hi Angus. The surveys we provided were done in accordance with best practice guidelines. They must be done this way to be accepted by your planning authority. We provided a report showing our recommendations - additional surveys were needed. The initial survey would have been needed no matter which surveyor you chose or what type of project you were working on.

Posted 3 years ago

“We were very poorly advised from the outset. if we had been given the proper advice we would have gone straight for the full survey rather than having a preliminary survey which added £700 to the total cost.”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 years ago

Hi Jennifer. You were advised correctly. In accordance with professional survey guidelines (Collins, 2016) a Preliminary Roost Assessment is the first stage in the bat survey process. You need a Preliminary Roost Assessment to identify roost features that bats might use as well as evidence of roosting bats. This is used to assess the roost value of the building for bats which, in turn, dictates the number of additional surveys that are necessary (if any) to establish roost presence/absence and to characterise any roosts present as well as the number of surveyors required to provide full coverage of the building. As part of the planning process, the LPA will expect to see a Preliminary Roost Assessment alongside any further bat surveys that may be required to determine a planning application, and it is a necessary first step to conserve bats and their roosts which are protected by law.

Posted 3 years ago

“Dreadful service. Very expensive, slow, extremely unclear and misleading T&Cs. Do not choose the so-called "Rapid" service - your report could take 3 weeks (or more) to be received. Will never use again, and make sure no one I know does either.”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 years ago

“We cancelled our survey due to Planning issues but were never informed of the cancellation fees at the time of booking or at the time of cancellation and have now been struck with a £350 fee to pay. Ludacris!”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 years ago

Our version of events is very different to yours as we had no record of any cancellation being made, either in writing or over the phone. As such, we attended the survey as agreed with our consultant. We could have rearranged the survey with no issues if we had received instructions to cancel.

Posted 3 years ago

“The company is misleading you as much as possible. I ordered a bat survey PRA (£ 649)assuming that I get an answer to my question. However the answer was - We can't tell and you need more bat surveys (£3500). Pointing out that had ordered a professional y/n opinion I was told, no, because there is small print on the oder form referring to a 'key fact doc' which is not the document attached to the order form and was not sent to me. However in there it stats that a possible outcome is 'We can't tell'. This is a license to print money and they are using it. Stay away is my recommendation. There is a reason why this is all hidden in a not submitted document.”

Helpful Report

Posted 3 years ago

“Having dealt with Arbtech for more than 4 years in an attempt to obtain a bat mitigation licence, despite them applying more than two years ago for this licence, it has still not been received. All necessary surveys were carried, at great cost, and I was not even told when the consultant dealing with this application left the company. I am totally dissatisfied with the service, or lack of it, that I have received, and hope that after todays telephone conversation the matter will be brought to a satisfactory conclusion without further cost to myself. It is also hoped that this review is put on your website to prove that it is not only positive feedback that is made public.”

Helpful Report

Posted 4 years ago

“Worse experience ever. £500 for 10 minute bat survey. Recommended 1 survey when I started to question the evidence it suddenly changed to 2 surveys . They even had the audacity to accuss me of swearring to there staff which is now with my soilictor .”

Helpful Report

Posted 4 years ago

As you well know, you were provided with a bat survey, a 26 page report and numerous lengthy emails helping you to understand the bat survey requirements after you were unhappy with the results. At Arbtech, we do not tolerate anyone being rude or abusive to our staff. We’ve already informed you that we won’t be working with you again and you will need to find another consultancy who will make the same recommendations.

Posted 4 years ago

“Got a booking form with different fees for a survey in a few weeks, one on next available day and one for next day service. Completed forms asked for next day service and didn’t hear back for 2 days. I called to ask why and was told they can’t do the survey for another 3 weeks !!!! If I hadn’t called myself they would not even have informed me they don’t actually have a next day service .”

Helpful Report

Posted 4 years ago

Hi Sukhbir. We do offer a next working day service but they can become unavailable due to high volumes of instructions. If that happens we will do everything we can to accommodate you as quickly as possible and charge a reduced fee which we did for you and you agreed to.

Posted 4 years ago

“This company has sufficient professional expertise to do bat surveys but grossly exaggerated the problem and hence the consequential fees for remedying it. Arbtech charged a larger than usual survey fee and £4500 for subsequent surveys. We were able to get adequate surveys done for less than £500. To be avoided”

Helpful Report

Posted 5 years ago

“So far so rubbish. Not clear on timeline. Not correct person named on report. Not receiving report via email unless phoning company to directly request it. £500 + initial consult with awful follow-up service. Company booked on first survey and then due to slack follow up as described above said they were unable to accommodate the subsequent surveys except within a whole year timeline. Not acceptable.”

Helpful Report

Posted 5 years ago

Dear Julia, We would like you to remove or withdraw your completely false review. It is simply unethical to leave negative reviews in the public domain simply because events outside of your (and our) control are not wholly and completely in your favour. You/your agent (whom you authorised to appoint us in writing) were advised in writing on the 13th of July that you required further surveys and then you/your agent took almost a month to respond, by which point the season has almost finished. It should therefore come as no surprise that we could not accomodate you because other, more organised clients have appointed us to capacity in the meantime. The £500+ you quote a); is our price including VAT, and b); is not an "initial consult" at all. It was a full PRA bat survey, quoted for in writing, in some considerable detail, on which you appointed us. It was a fixed-fee and included our expenses, travelling time, site survey, mileage and your report. Finally, your report was (and is) entirely correct and accurate. Any delays for you to complete your further surveys are entirely because you/your agent took almost a month to respond to us, at a highly critical time in the year. I will be contacting you by phone and in writing to discuss this further. Sincerely, Robert Oates Managing Director

Posted 5 years ago

“I was told I needed part 1 which would comply with most council's tree survey request. Council not happy with it now Arbtech want me to pay another 500 for part 2 .Ridiculously expensive .Extremely dissatisfied customer”

Helpful Report

Posted 7 years ago

Arbtech Reviews

About Arbtech:

Phone:

Location: