Professional negligence property

If you have suffered a financial loss as a result of negligent advice or services provided by a solicitor, conveyancer, surveyor, valuer, estate agent or financial adviser in connection with a property transaction or investment, our property disputes solicitors have extensive experience resolving professional negligence claims.

What is professional negligence in the property context?

Professional negligence occurs where a professional fails to meet the standard of skill and care that a reasonably competent member of their profession would have exercised in the same circumstances (a duty of care), and that failure causes the client to suffer a loss they would not otherwise have suffered.

In the property context, the financial consequences of professional negligence can be significant. Property transactions frequently involve large sums of money and an error by a solicitor, surveyor or other professional at a critical moment can result in losses running to hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Property professional negligence claims can be complex. Establishing that the professional failed to meet the required standard, that their failure caused the specific loss complained of, and that the loss falls within the scope of the duty they owed, all require careful analysis and, in most cases, expert evidence.

You will find answers to common questions to professional negligence in the FAQs at the bottom of this page.

What does a professional negligence solicitor do?

Professional negligence claims against property professionals rarely succeed without a thorough understanding of the underlying property law issue – for example, whether that is a title defect that should have been spotted, a valuation that was outside the acceptable range, or a planning or environmental issue that proper due diligence would have revealed. Our property disputes team has extensive expertise in the property context, with a wealth of experience advising clients who have suffered loss because of negligence by property professionals.

The aim is to always try and settle the dispute without the need for the intervention of the court (using private negotiation, arbitration, mediation, expert determination and other forms of alternative dispute resolution) but, in circumstances where that is not possible, the property disputes team have experience of successfully taking professional negligence property claims all the way to trial.

Our property disputes team focuses on getting to the heart of a property professional negligence dispute, clearly understanding your objectives, carefully managing risk and achieving a swift, efficient and cost-effective resolution. The team’s ethos is simple: solve the problem.

Why choose B P Collins as your property professional negligence solicitors?

With over 60 years of experience, we’re consistently ranked by Chambers UK and The Legal 500 for the strength of our property litigation practice. Our solicitors have helped hundreds of individuals, developers and companies navigate property professional negligence claims with confidence and clarity.

As is often the situation with most disputes, early advice can often result in a swift outcome, avoiding unnecessary escalation.

Contact our professional negligence solicitors today

For further information or advice please contact our professional property negligence lawyers. Our teams are based in London, Thame and Gerrards Cross, and can be contacted on 01753 889995 or at enquiries@bpcollins.co.uk.

Professional negligence property FAQs

What do I need to prove to bring a professional negligence claim?

To succeed in a professional negligence claim you must establish three things:

that the professional owed you a duty of care;
that they breached that duty by falling below the standard of a reasonably competent member of their profession; and
that their breach caused you to suffer a loss that falls within the scope of the duty they owed.

What are common examples of negligence by a conveyancing solicitor?

The most common examples include:

Failure to identify a title defect (such as a restrictive covenant, adverse possession risk, missing easement, or defect in the seller’s title) that would have affected the client’s decision to proceed or the price they were willing to pay.
Failure to carry out or advise on the results of searches (including local authority, drainage, environmental and chancel repair liability searches) that would have revealed information material to the transaction.
Failure to advise on the existence or implications of planning permissions, building regulations consents, or the absence of either in relation to works carried out at the property.
Failure to register the client’s title or a mortgage at HM Land Registry promptly, resulting in a priority loss.
Errors in the drafting of the transfer, lease or other transaction documents that result in the client acquiring fewer or different rights than they intended.
Failure to advise on a break clause, renewal right, or other important lease term in a commercial transaction.
Failure to account correctly for completion monies or to protect a deposit.

Where a solicitor has been negligent during a conveyance, the starting point for assessing loss is usually the difference between the value of the property as purchased (with the defect or problem that should have been identified) and its value as it was represented or assumed to be. In some cases, the loss will extend to consequential losses such as the costs of remediation, abortive transaction costs, and losses flowing from delays to a development or investment programme.

What are common examples of negligence by a surveyor arising from pre-purchase property surveys?

The most common examples include:

Failure to identify or adequately report on structural defects (including subsidence, settlement, inadequate foundations, roof defects, damp, and rot) that were reasonably visible at the time of the inspection.
Failure to recommend further specialist investigation where the condition of the property was such that a reasonably competent surveyor would have done so.
Misleading or inadequate description of the condition of the property in the survey report.
Failure to identify or report on the presence of hazardous materials such as asbestos, Japanese knotweed or contamination.

What are common examples of negligence by a surveyor in construction and project management contexts?

Failing to identify defects such as structural movement, damp, timber decay, or roof and cladding problems that a reasonably competent surveyor should have spotted.
Producing inaccurate cost estimates, bills of quantities, or measurements that mislead the client on the true cost of a project.
Certifying excessive interim payments to a contractor and leaving the employer exposed if the contractor becomes insolvent.
Issuing practical completion, payment, or making-good certificates when the works are not in fact complete or satisfactory.

Reporting inaccurately to a funder or purchaser on build progress, quality, cost, or compliance, so that money is advanced on a false picture.

What are common examples of negligence by a valuer?

Common grounds of challenge in valuation negligence claims include:

Use of inappropriate comparable transactions – selecting comparables that were not genuinely comparable in terms of location, condition, specification or timing.
Failure to investigate or adequately take into account factors affecting value, such as planning restrictions, flood risk, contamination, structural issues, or tenancy terms.
Failure to apply the correct valuation methodology for the type of property or transaction in question.
Errors in the calculation of net income or yield in the valuation of investment property.

Valuers are not guarantors of accuracy – valuation is an opinion-based exercise and a degree of variation between valuers is expected and acceptable. The courts recognise this by reference to the concept of the ‘valuation bracket’: a valuer is not negligent merely because their figure was higher or lower than another valuer’s. However, where a valuation falls outside the range within which a competent valuer could reasonably have arrived, it is open to challenge. Expert valuation evidence is essential in any valuation negligence claim.

What are common examples of negligence by a financial adviser or mortgage broker?

Common allegations of negligence in the property finance context include:

Advising a client to take out a mortgage product that was unsuitable for their circumstances – for example, recommending an interest-only mortgage without adequately explaining the capital repayment risk, or recommending a fixed-rate product without advising on early repayment charges.
Failure to source the most appropriate product from the market – particularly relevant for whole-of-market brokers who hold themselves out as considering all available lenders.
Failure to advise adequately on the risks of a particular lending structure, such as a buy-to-let mortgage used in circumstances where a residential mortgage was more appropriate.
Negligent advice in connection with equity release, which can result in a property owner giving up a far greater proportion of the equity in their home than they understood.
Failure to advise on the implications of personal guarantees given in connection with commercial property finance.

What losses can be recovered in property negligence claims against financial advisers or mortgage brokers?

Where negligent advice from a financial adviser or mortgage broker causes financial loss, a claim is usually based on the difference between the client’s actual financial position and the position they would have been in had they received competent advice. Claims of this nature can involve significant sums, particularly where property values have fallen or where an unsuitable product has resulted in missed investment returns or loss of a property.

What is the Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence and why does it matter?

Before issuing court proceedings in a professional negligence claim, the claimant is required to follow the Pre-Action Protocol for Professional Negligence. The Protocol is designed to encourage early exchange of information, to enable the parties to assess the merits of the claim without the need for litigation, and to promote settlement wherever possible.

The Protocol requires the claimant to send a detailed letter of claim to the defendant professional setting out the allegations of negligence, the factual background, the loss suffered and the remedy sought. The professional then has a defined period to investigate and respond, either by admitting the claim, making a settlement offer, or providing a reasoned letter of response setting out their position. The Protocol also encourages the parties to consider alternative dispute resolution, including mediation, as a means of resolving the dispute without court proceedings.

Compliance with the Protocol is not merely a procedural formality. A court may impose costs sanctions on a party who has failed to comply with it without good reason.

Do I need expert evidence to bring a professional negligence claim?

Yes. Expert evidence from an independent professional in the same field as the defendant will usually be required to establish that the defendant fell below the required standard of care. A court will generally not be able to assess whether a solicitor, surveyor or valuer acted negligently without the assistance of an expert who can explain what a competent professional in that position should have done and why the defendant’s conduct fell short of that standard.

Expert evidence will also usually be required on the question of loss. In a valuation negligence claim, an independent valuer will be needed to assess what the correct valuation should have been. In a conveyancing negligence claim involving a title defect, an expert may be needed to assess the impact of the defect on the value of the property. In a surveyor negligence claim, a building surveyor or structural engineer may be needed to assess the cost of remedying the defect that was missed.

Is it too late to bring a claim? Understanding limitation in professional negligence cases.

Time limits, known as limitation periods, are one of the most important issues in professional negligence cases. It is crucial to take legal advice promptly if you think you may have a claim, because a claim that is issued after the relevant limitation period has expired will generally be struck out, regardless of its merits.

For contractual claims, the basic limitation period is six years from the date of the breach of contract – typically the date of the negligent act or omission.
For tortious claims, the basic period is six years from the date on which the damage was suffered.

In many property cases, these two periods will run from the same point: the date of the negligent transaction. If the negligence was not discovered straight away, the Limitation Act 1980 may allow three years from the date you first became aware, or ought reasonably to have become aware, of the claim. However, there is an absolute longstop of 15 years from the negligent act itself.

The limitation position in any given case depends on the specific facts and requires careful analysis.

Our Property disputes services