Discusses the extent of lenders' obligations to achieve a proper price for repossessed property in the light of a recent case "Michael v Miller" ([2004] EWCA Civ 282, [2004] PLSCS 70). In this repossession case the judge had used the margin of error principle in determining the market value of the property for sale. Whilst the appellants counsel deemed this principle to be useful in valuer negligence claims, in this case it was considered inappropriate because the key point was whether the lenders through their agent had taken all reasonable steps to get the best sale price reasonably attainable, which the appellants claimed they had not. CA did not accept this argument and concurred that the margin of error principle was as appropriate to claims against mortgagees as against valuers and useful to a court in answering questions about a lender's judgement on reasonable price. View judgment at www.bailii.org.