Tweet
Hubbard v Bank of Scotland Plc (t/a Birmingham Midshires) & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 648
More...
Once it is accepted that it lies properly within the expertise of a valuation surveyor to form a view on the likelihood of ongoing movement to a house, and the view which he comes to is one which he is reasonably entitled to reach, then at least within the context of a limited valuation survey of the kind in issue in this case, the valuation surveyor's duty does not require him to recommend a full structural report. The judge was entitled to hold on the material before him that Mr Handley's report was not negligent. That conclusion makes it unnecessary to decide whether the judge was right in the final sentence of paragraph 48 to say that the report did specifically recommend Mrs Hubbard to take independent advise. The report certainly does not advise her not to take such advice; it points out that she is free to do so on technical matters, of which this is plainly an example. I think a fairer reading of the report lies between those two extremes: it reminds Mrs Hubbard of the availability of more detailed advice should she decide to take it and consider it worthwhile. It follows that it is not necessary to decide what conclusion the judge should have reached on the issue of causation.
