CA 2 July 1992. The defendants, G, were a firm of valuers and surveyors. In August 1989 the plaintiffs, E, were contemplating making a loan on security of a property, the amount being for £1.92m, 80% of the purchase price of £2.4m. E instructed G to value the property. E issued a report dated 29 August 1989 which contained comments about the current use of the property and information which they claimed had been obtained from the local authority in regard to planning proposals. It set the open market value with vacant possession at £2.4m. In September E agreed to lend the money. The borrower defaulted on the loan and after appointing a receiver E realised the security by sale. The sale price was no more than £800,000. In April 1991 E appointed another firm of surveyors to inspect the property with a view to commenting on G`s report. This surveyor expressed disagreement with the planning assumptions and the calculation of the gross internal floor area and expressed the opinion that in