<div id="myExtraContent1"> </div>
<div id="myExtraContent5"> </div>

Buyers of property to let less deserving of protection

Per Scullion v Bank of Scotland plc (t/a Colleys) [2011] the Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court decision that for buy-to-let residential property the valuer was liable to the purchaser.

The CA held that although the valuer had been negligent and the purchaser had relied upon the valuer’s report (amongst other advice) when deciding to proceed, the purchaser did not establish foreseeability of damage or a sufficient degree of proximity between himself and the valuer.
Nor did the purchaser show that it would be "fair, just and reasonable" to impose (on the valuer) a duty of care to the purchaser. The Court held there were important distinctions to be made between valuations for buy-to-let purposes and those made for home buyers.

The court commented that those buying properties to let, were less "deserving of protection by the common law against the risk of negligence than those buying to occupy as their residence."

Listed Buildings

English Heritage has created a searchable database of all nationally designated heritage assets including Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields and Protected Wreck Sites.

http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/

Cookies

Commencing 26 May 2011, all UK businesses and organisations running websites in the UK are required by law to obtain people’s consent before they install cookies on their machines. (A cookie is a line of code that enables websites to monitor visitor usage, etc: it does not identify the actual user.)

None of the websites that I run and maintain install cookies, but the company whose services I use to monitor usage does install cookies. I am checking the legality of that as far my responsibility is concerned. Frankly I think cookies are an invasion of privacy although I accept they are necessary in some matters so if it transpires that I need to obtain your consent then I shall end the arrangement with the monitoring company.

RICS dispute resolution fee

RICS dispute resolution application fee
With effect from 4 January 2011, the application fee payable to the RICS is £369.00 (inclusive of VAT at 20%)
Previously:

2000 April  -  £275 inclusive of VAT
2002 August - £300 inclusive of VAT 
2006 June  - £320 inclusive of VAT
2008 April  - £340.00 inclusive VAT
2009 April 15 - £333 inclusive of VAT (15%)
2009 June 15 - £353 inclusive of VAT
2010 to 3 January 2011 - £361.00 inclusive of VAT (17.5%)
2011 January 4 - £369 inclusive of VAT (20%)


Expert Witness Lip service

I have become so fed up with chartered surveyors paying ‘lip service’ to the RICS Practise Statement and guidance Notes for chartered surveyors acting as expert witness at rent review but ignoring the substantive provisions that I am going to make formal complaints to the President of the RICS.


In one case recently, the tenant’s expert witness surveyor, apparently on the RICS panel, failed to disclose that he and his firm are retained advisers for the tenant. The expert witness opinion was partisan and when challenged he said he was not answerable to me. Fair enough, but he is answerable to the RICS and being on RICS panel for dispute resolution appointed surveyors has a duty to set a good example.

In another matter at present, where I’m acting for the tenant, the landlord’s surveyor now acting as expert witness, quite apart from describing his report as a submission, thereby confirming ignorance of terminology, is basically arguing the matter as if an advocate.