Outer House 28 March 1991. An action by H against S, a firm of chartered surveyors, for damages following on a report made by S at the time that H were purchasing a dwelling house and adjoining shop premises. The action was based on the alleged failure of S to observe and report on various defects. There was a dispute between the parties as to whether the report instructed had been a full survey or a valuation for loan purposes. It was accepted that the general rule is that the proper measure of damages is the difference between the price paid and the market price the premises would fetch on the basis of their actual condition. The damages claimed included the cost of alternative accommodation and board and lodging for the purchasers children whilst defects were being remedied. Held that the assessment of damages was not governed by a single rule of the sort contended for; and proof before answer allowed.