Hubbard v Bank of Scotland Plc (t/a Birmingham Midshires) & Anor

Hubbard v Bank of Scotland Plc (t/a Birmingham Midshires) & Anor

The surveyor's report was not negligent as it reflected the state of the property at the time, identified historic movement, and did not reveal evidence of ongoing subsidence. The duty of care did not require recommending a full structural survey based solely on minor, long-standing cracks. The surveyor acted in accordance with accepted professional practice.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Ann Marie Hubbard; Respondent/defendant: Bank of Scotland PLC (trading as Birmingham Midshires); Respondent/defendant: Bank of Scotland PLC (trading as Colleys)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Surveyor's Duty of Care, Valuation Reports, Negligence, Causation
Professional Negligence Property Law Surveyor's Duty of Care Valuation Reports Negligence Causation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ann Marie Hubbard

Appellant/claimant

Bank of Scotland PLC (trading as Birmingham Midshires)

Respondent/defendant

Bank of Scotland PLC (trading as Colleys)

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the surveyor's valuation report was negligent for failing to recommend a full structural survey given visible cracking and the property's location
  2. 2 Whether the surveyor owed a duty to advise the claimant to seek further specialist advice
  3. 3 Whether the claimant relied on the report in purchasing the property

Ratio Decidendi

The surveyor's report was not negligent as it reflected the state of the property at the time, identified historic movement, and did not reveal evidence of ongoing subsidence. The duty of care did not require recommending a full structural survey based solely on minor, long-standing cracks. The surveyor acted in accordance with accepted professional practice.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed