Slightly biased view from an Architect but one who comes from a family of builders, trained and worked as a technician before becoming an Architect, these days I run a small practice. It might be fairer to say that a technician or building surveyor 'could' be just as good, they may be better for your particular circumstances and I have no qualms in advising this. However, if you are after a quality service, then check that your 'designer' has Indemnity Insurance. All architects have trained for far too many years and are registered with ARB. ARB ensures we carry insurance and upholds professional standards on behalf of the public. Architects need not join the RIBA and don't have to use their guidance on working methods and fees etc, although the whole idea is that this ensures quality. We do 30-40 domestic jobs annually, fees range from a few hundred to thousands, depending on the particular project and our involvement, we often negotiate and aim to work within budgets but also have standards to maintain, mainly because we want to minimise risks for you, as this equates to problems for us. You may be better off with a simple plan drawing service, you will no doubt be willing to manage the process yourself, take on the risks and be confident in tackling all eventualities. Whoever does the work won't be able to change the fact that the price you pay equates to the time allocated to your project, a low fee will have a low level of input. It is reasonable to say that on the whole you�ll get what you pay for. Architects spend a lot of money each year just to operate, maintaining their professional status and insuring clients against anything they might get wrong (and are bound to continue this insurance for a number of years); I would like to think this demonstrates we're serious about providing a reliable, honest and good quality service, if that's what you�re after.