Disappointed Homebuyers Secure Six-Figure Damages From Negligent Surveyor

30th October 2020 By

One good reason why sensible homebuyers engage the services of a surveyor prior to purchase is that, if things go wrong, they at least have someone to sue. In a case on point, a couple who paid £1.2 million for a seaside home which turned out to be riddled with defects won six-figure compensation from a negligent surveyor.

The property had been largely rebuilt in the months before the couple bought it. They instructed a surveyor to conduct a non-structural inspection. He reported potential problems with drainage, rainwater pipes and gutters. In the light of his report, the purchase price was reduced from £1.24 million prior to completion.

After the couple moved in, it swiftly became apparent that the property was riddled to a remarkable extent with defects of varying severity, many if not all of which would not have been observable by a surveyor performing a non-structural survey. By far the most serious problem, however, was damp ingress.

After the couple launched professional negligence proceedings against the surveyor, the High Court noted that its task was to decide whether he fell below his normally high standards in reporting on the property’s condition. He had carried out numerous damp readings during the inspection, none of which revealed any problem.

He had, however, breached the duty he owed the couple in failing to report that he could not see visible damp proofing and that further investigations were required. He was also negligent in failing to advise the couple that they should obtain a professional consultant’s certificate in order to establish that the rebuilding works had been carried out to a satisfactory standard.

The Court found that, had the surveyor’s report contained the advice that it should have done, the couple would never have bought the property. Their damages thus stood to be calculated on an assessment of the difference in value between the property with the defects as reported by the surveyor and its value with all the defects which in fact existed.

Calculating the diminution in the property’s value by reference to the cost of demolishing and rebuilding it, the Court found that the couple were entitled to £750,000. Giving credit for sums that they had already received from third parties, the Court awarded them a total of £389,000. That included £15,000 to reflect the distress and inconvenience that they suffered.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Award That Requires Borrowing Made Into Court Order

17th May, 2024 By

Disagreements between separating couples all too often result in litigation that substantially reduces the assets available to them, as was illustrated by a case that recently reached the High Court. At issue was whether awards made by arbitrators in financial remedy proceedings can be made into court orders even if that would require one of the parties to borrow money. The couple had previously had a relationship lasting a few years before resuming their relationship in 2015. They had two children before separating again in 2019. Following their separation, the...

Inheritance Disputes – Costs Risks Can Be Reduced

15th May, 2024 By

Arguments about what someone promised before their death can lead to significant legal costs. However, if faced with a claim against the estate, there may be steps the beneficiaries or executors can take to reduce the risks, as a recent High Court case illustrated. A man had left a farmhouse and agricultural land in Cornwall to his wife, with whom he had also jointly owned a neighbouring area of land. After his death, one of the couple's daughters and her husband claimed that he had told them he wanted them...

Share Rounding Error Does Not Prevent CGT Relief

13th May, 2024 By

There are often very specific rules that must be complied with in order to claim tax reliefs, but if a small mistake arises, the courts may be able to provide assistance. In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found that an investor was entitled to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the disposal of his shares in a company, despite owning one share fewer than he needed to qualify for it. The investor had agreed to purchase 5 per cent of the shares in the company for £500,000. He wished to own...

Wife Entitled to Maintenance Until Sale of Family Home

10th May, 2024 By

When divorcing couples disagree on how assets should be divided, the courts will seek to arrive at a fair outcome for both parties. In deciding how the proceeds of sale of a former couple's home should be apportioned, the Family Court agreed with the wife that she should receive maintenance payments until the sale took place. The couple had married in 2006. Following a brief separation, they had reconciled for two years before finally separating in 2022. The husband and wife both contended that they should be entitled to about...