UK: Scullion – The Trend Is Nigh

Last Updated: 27 June 2011
Article by Martin Paxton and Tony Nursh-Marsh

Claims by lenders against valuers have now become commonplace, particularly in the buy-to-let arena, following the well publicised property crash. However, valuers and their insurers had hoped to avoid claims from buy-to-let borrowers by arguing that no duty of care could be owed in circumstances where such purchases were not standard residential transactions.

This issue (along with the effectiveness of disclaimers and the quantification of loss in borrower claims) was addressed in the March 2010 High Court decision of Scullion v Bank of Scotland plc (t/a Colleys). The trial judge found for the borrower, Mr Scullion, giving rise to the possibility of a new and, for the surveying community, an unwelcome trend of new claims.

Given the judge's findings, perhaps unsurprisingly the decision was appealed by Colleys. The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the appeal.

The facts

Scullion concerned the purchase in 2002, by Mr Scullion of a flat in a new-build residential block in Surrey. Mr Scullion applied for an 80 per cent mortgage from a specialist buy-to-let mortgage provider, Mortgages Plc. In his application form, Mr Scullion stated that the purchase price/estimated value was £352,950. In actual fact, he had been given a 15 per cent "gifted allowance" by the developer and the developer had deferred a further 10 per cent of the purchase price for one year. The result was that the total amount payable to the developer up front to complete the purchase, was only £264,712.50.

Colleys assessed the open market value as the price at which they believed Mr Scullion was purchasing the flat, £353,000. They assessed the rental that could be achieved at £2,000 per month – sufficient to service Mr Scullion's mortgage payments of around £1,440 per month. After completion, Mr Scullion was only able to let the flat for around one half of the figure that Colleys had predicted. The flat was eventually sold in May 2006 for £270,000 and Mr Scullion sued Colleys.

The first instance decision

Mr Richard Snowden QC sitting as a deputy High Court judge made the following findings:

Reliance

He accepted Mr Scullion's evidence that it was essential the property was worth the value which Colleys had placed upon it and rejected Colleys' assertion that there could be no reliance in circumstances where the report had not been seen prior to exchange of contracts.

Duty of Care

Following Smith v Bush (1990), and rejecting Colleys' submissions, he found that Colleys owed a duty of care to Mr Scullion as the flat purchased was a small residential property and the valuer accepted in evidence that he knew that Mr Scullion would probably be shown his report and was probably paying for it. As a general proposition the judge was not prepared to accept that a buy-to-let transaction was very different from an ordinary residential house purchase.1

Damages

The Court found that the correct capital value for the property at the relevant time was £300,000. However, Mr Scullion had in fact only paid £298,000 for the property and the judge concluded that Mr Scullion had not, therefore, suffered any capital loss. That said, having assessed the correct rental achievable per calendar month as being £1,100, the judge found that Mr Scullion could recover losses including his extra financing costs incurred to cover the difference between the mortgage payments he had made and the rental income he had in fact received. The judge therefore awarded just over £72,000, plus interest and costs.

The appeal

Colleys appealed on the grounds that there had been no reliance on the valuer by Mr Scullion, no duty of care arose and that Mr Scullion was not entitled to damages to reflect the negligently high rental valuation.

The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the appeal (with Lord Neuberger MR giving the leading decision) for the following reasons:

Reliance

The Court of Appeal considered that this issue is one of fact and one very much for the trial judge who had correctly addressed the issues.

Duty of care

The trial judge's findings that the valuer knew or ought to have known that there was a high probability that the report would be shown to Mr Scullion, that he might rely on it and that Mr Scullion would pay for the report could only take Mr Scullion so far.

The Court of Appeal noted that in addition, following Smith v Bush and Harris v Wyre Forest (1990) and Caparo v Dickman (1990), in order to establish a duty of care, the purchaser would need to establish foreseeability of damage, proximity and that it would be "fair, just and reasonable" to impose a duty of care on the valuers.

The Court of Appeal found that this was not a case such as those considered in Smith v Bush involving an ordinary domestic householder purchasing his residence but rather a purchase purely for the purpose of investment. Accordingly, it was not sufficiently clear on the evidence available to the judge that it would have been foreseeable to the valuer that Mr Scullion would rely on the report rather than, say, advice from an estate agent or his own valuer.

Lord Neuberger MR specifically found that the decision in Harris v Wyre Forest should not be extended when the perceived policy basis for the decision did not exist because:

  • this was a commercial transaction;
  • there was no evidence to support the suggestion that purchasers of buy-to-let properties relied on mortgage valuations in the same way as residential purchasers;
  • there would be important matters a purchaser would want to know not covered in the report to the mortgagee such as the likely length of time it would take to rent the property and any rent free period necessary (these considerations would not of course apply in a residential purchase situation); and
  • the mortgage company would primarily be interested in the capital value of the property, the rental value section being included primarily to confirm it was suitable for the purpose for which it was being acquired.

Damages

Although Lord Neuberger MR considered that no duty of care arose, he went on to deal with the question of damages, albeit briefly. He found that the trial judge's approach had not been "wholly correct" and had come close to treating the valuer's negligent misstatement as a warranty.

The trial judge had correctly accepted that the approach in this case should be governed by the guidance of the House of Lords in SAAMCo v York Montague Ltd (1997), namely that the damages must reflect "the consequences of the [relevant] information being inaccurate". However, Lord Neuberger MR considered that the trial judge had effectively ascribed all the loss of revenue suffered by Mr Scullion to the inaccurate rental valuation which was incorrect. Instead, the correct measure of loss would have been the value of the rental income given by Colleys less the rent actually achieved over the relevant period (ie £2,000 less £1,050). It was also necessary to consider and discount periods during which the property would have been unlet for reasons other than delay caused by marketing the property at unrealistic levels of rent.

Conclusion

Scullion involved an intricate buy-to-let web, involving specialist packagers, developers' incentives and multiple valuation re-types by the valuers. Notwithstanding this, the first instance decision clearly paved the way for amateur investors, who in some cases had taken something of a gamble in the hope that property prices would continue to increase, to seek to recover their shortfall from the valuer when that gamble had not paid off.

Whilst there is no sign of the wave of lenders' claims coming to an end, the Court of Appeal decision is clearly good news for valuers and their insurers. Whilst it is arguable that the first instance decision did not give rise to the volume of claims feared, it will now be harder for even the most opportune disgruntled buy-to-let borrower to seek redress from the valuer.

Of course where there is a will there is a way and it is conceivable that there will be circumstances where a buy-to-let borrower might be able to recover from the valuer, such as where a valuer is expressly aware that the borrower is not obtaining his own report or where the valuer has given more advice about the rental potential than was the case in Scullion.

Footnote

1 It is worth noting that although not subject to the appeal, the trial judge found that Colleys could not avoid liability by relying on the disclaimer clause in the mortgage application form (in which Mr Scullion declared that the valuers would not be liable to him in relation to the valuation) because they could not discharge the burden under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 of showing that the disclaimer was fair and reasonable.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.