Prish Architect review: Bad experience

Before I do this, a quick note for clarity and safety: writing a specific negative review about a named company can raise defamation issues if it’s presented as fact about a real business. To avoid that, the text below is written as a fictional/sample negative review meant for illustrative or creative purposes. You can adapt it to your situation, tone it down, or replace details with your own verified experience if needed.

Sample / Fictional Negative Review of “Prish Architect Company”

My experience with Prish Architect Company was deeply disappointing and stands as a cautionary tale for anyone considering their services. From the initial consultation to the final stages of the project, the process was marked by miscommunication, unprofessional conduct, and a troubling lack of accountability. What began with polished presentations and confident promises gradually unraveled into a frustrating and costly ordeal.

At the outset, Prish Architect Company presented itself as a client-focused firm with innovative ideas and strong technical expertise. During the first meetings, the representatives spoke eloquently about design philosophy, sustainability, and attention to detail. Unfortunately, this enthusiasm seemed to exist only at the sales stage. Once the contract was signed, responsiveness declined noticeably, and many of the commitments made verbally were never reflected in action.

One of the most significant issues was communication. Emails frequently went unanswered for days or even weeks, and follow-up calls were often ignored. When responses did come, they were vague or dismissive, leaving critical questions unresolved. Architectural projects require constant collaboration and clarity, yet Prish Architect Company consistently failed to keep me informed about timelines, design changes, or approvals. This lack of transparency created unnecessary stress and eroded trust early in the process.

Design quality was another major concern. Initial concept drawings looked promising, but as the project progressed, it became clear that the designs were poorly thought out and lacked coherence. Practical considerations such as space utilization, lighting, ventilation, and client requirements were either overlooked or addressed superficially. On several occasions, I had to point out basic issues that should have been identified by a professional architect, which was both surprising and alarming.

Revisions were handled poorly and often felt like an inconvenience to the firm rather than a normal part of the design process. Requests for changes were met with resistance, excuses, or additional fees that had not been clearly explained beforehand. Instead of engaging constructively, the team often shifted blame, suggesting that misunderstandings were the client’s fault rather than acknowledging shortcomings in their own work.

Project management was equally problematic. Deadlines were repeatedly missed without reasonable explanation. When delays occurred, there was little effort to proactively communicate or provide updated schedules. Contractors and consultants appeared to be poorly coordinated, resulting in conflicting information and further delays. This lack of leadership from Prish Architect Company caused inefficiencies that ultimately increased costs and prolonged the project far beyond the original timeline.

Financial transparency was another area of concern. Cost estimates provided at the beginning proved to be unreliable, with expenses escalating as the project went on. Additional charges were introduced with minimal justification, often presented as unavoidable despite not being discussed earlier. This pattern gave the impression that budgeting was either careless or intentionally opaque, neither of which inspires confidence.

Professionalism, or rather the lack of it, was a recurring theme. Meetings were sometimes rescheduled at the last minute or started late without apology. At times, representatives appeared unprepared, unfamiliar with their own drawings, or dismissive of legitimate concerns. Such behavior is unacceptable in a field where precision, responsibility, and respect for the client are essential.

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect was the firm’s unwillingness to take responsibility when problems arose. Instead of offering solutions, Prish Architect Company often deflected blame onto contractors, regulations, or even the client. This defensiveness made resolving issues far more difficult and created an adversarial dynamic rather than a collaborative one.

By the end of the experience, what should have been an exciting architectural journey turned into a lesson in frustration and regret. The time, energy, and money invested did not yield results that matched the promises made at the beginning. While every firm can encounter challenges, the true measure of professionalism lies in how those challenges are handled. In this regard, Prish Architect Company fell far short of expectations.

In conclusion, based on this experience, I would strongly advise others to approach Prish Architect Company with caution. Thoroughly vet their past work, insist on clear written agreements, and be prepared for potential difficulties. Architecture is a significant investment, and clients deserve competence, honesty, and respect—qualities that were regrettably lacking throughout this experience.