[2009] EWCA Civ 1024, 13 October 2009. The case relates to an appeal against a professional negligence from a surveyor. The appellant (L) chose the defendant (R), a firm of surveyors to act for her in acquiring the extension of the lease of her flat. R served a notice under S42 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing And Urban Development Act 1993. An application would have to be made to the Leasehold and Valuation Tribunal (LVT) on 8th November 2000 or the application would have to be withdrawn. R warned L about the non-payment of his invoice which she disregarded. Because of failure to apply by the deadline, she had to purchase the extension of the lease at a higher price. She appealed against R for failing to advise her on the need to make an LVT application. R argued that the instruction ceased before the LVT application had to be made. "Held:" appeal allowed. In August, R still regarded themselves as acting in behalf of L. This was again valid on 8th November. L, being a client inexperienced in this field, could be expected to rely on professional advisers to be reminded of the necessity to take on appropriate measures to protect her position.