Image from Google Jackets

Howard and Another v Horne and Sons (a firm)

Language: English Series: Construction Industry Law Letter ; (1989) CILL 500-501(2)Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: A claim for damages by a purchaser (H), for the costs of rewiring and consequential damage to a house they purchased. H requested a RICS House Buyers Report which surveyors (HO) undertook. Included in the report was a statement on the wiring : "electrical wiring is in Pvc cable". H understood this to mean it was modern and there was no need for concern. The report also had a note on services saying only a visual inspection had been made, they had not been tested and a specialist would need to be consulted as to the standards of any installations. The report had been made negligently; only some wiring was Pvc covered, the rest was in a dangerous state - this was agreed by both parties. H had the property rewired at a cost in excess of £6,000 and claimed damages against HO. Two issues arose: 1) were HO liable to H?; 2) if so, what was the measure of the damages. ORC held that HO were both in breach of contract with H and in breach of a duty of care . H formulated their claim on the bas
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS41148 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 28444-1001

A claim for damages by a purchaser (H), for the costs of rewiring and consequential damage to a house they purchased. H requested a RICS House Buyers Report which surveyors (HO) undertook. Included in the report was a statement on the wiring : "electrical wiring is in Pvc cable". H understood this to mean it was modern and there was no need for concern. The report also had a note on services saying only a visual inspection had been made, they had not been tested and a specialist would need to be consulted as to the standards of any installations. The report had been made negligently; only some wiring was Pvc covered, the rest was in a dangerous state - this was agreed by both parties. H had the property rewired at a cost in excess of £6,000 and claimed damages against HO. Two issues arose: 1) were HO liable to H?; 2) if so, what was the measure of the damages. ORC held that HO were both in breach of contract with H and in breach of a duty of care . H formulated their claim on the bas