Skip to main content
The standard applies to RICS members and RICS-regulated firms that use AI systems in delivering surveying services. Size, structure and location do not change that.

​
Sole practitioners are not exempt

Nothing in the standard scales its duties by headcount. A sole practitioner using an AI assistant to summarise a document they then rely on in a report is doing the thing the standard is about, and owes the same duties as a hundred-person practice. What changes with size is proportionality of implementation, not the existence of the obligation. A one-person risk register is still a risk register.

​
What “using AI” covers

Wider than most firms assume when they first read it. It includes:
  • general-purpose assistants used for drafting, summarising or research
  • transcription and meeting-notes tools
  • AI features built into software your firm already licenses, where the AI output feeds the work
  • systems procured as part of a broader solution, where AI is embedded rather than sold as AI
  • systems your firm develops itself, which additionally pick up Section 5. Say so on the Organisation page and your AI policy adds wording for in-house development.
What matters is what the output does, not what the product is called. If an output can influence the service you deliver, it counts.

​
Duties gated by material impact

Several of the heavier obligations only bite where AI has a material impact on service delivery:
  • the risk register (3.3)
  • pre-procurement supplier due diligence (4.1)
  • the written reliability decision on outputs (4.2)
  • the terms of engagement disclosures (4.3)
Materiality is judged on the facts of each use, not settled once for a whole category of tool.

​
Duties that apply regardless

The wording of these duties does not depend on material impact. Clause 1.2 sets the standard’s overall scope, so whether they apply to use that is not material is a judgement for your firm. guardbook treats them as applying whenever you use AI:
  • Section 2 baseline knowledge, for any member using AI systems to deliver surveying services
  • Clause 3.1 data governance, including the restriction on uploading private and confidential data to AI systems
  • Clause 3.2 policies and training expectations
  • Clause 4.4 the ability to provide written information on request
Clause 3.1 is the one firms underestimate.It prohibits uploading private and confidential data to an AI system unless both conditions are met: express written consent in advance from the affected stakeholders, and reasonable steps taken to satisfy yourself that uploading to that system does not pose an unacceptable risk.“Private and confidential information” is broader than client data. It covers anything that must not be unlawfully obtained, used or disclosed, including personal data under UK GDPR and potentially commercially sensitive information.

​
Firms outside the UK

The standard applies in all jurisdictions. Where it conflicts with local legislation, the legislation takes precedence, but the firm must record the conflict and report it to RICS.
guardbook is currently built for UK firms and does not provide a workflow for recording and reporting a conflict with local legislation. If your firm operates outside the UK, keep that record separately.