000			01582cab a2200229 4500
001			ABS39394
008			090401t1988 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u16350
041			_aeng
245			_aRoberts and Another v J Hampson and Co
260			_c1988
350			_a0
490			_aNew Law Journal _v138(6360) 10 June 1988, 166-167(2)
520			_aQBD 26 May 1988. Action by housebuyers (R) for damages for alleged negligence against a firm of surveyors , one of whose employees (H) carried out a building society valuation on a bungalow purchased by R. H used a damp meter and noticed rot over about two-thirds of one of the skirting-board s, but failed to lift the carpets and did not move the furniture. H advised the building society , (the Halifax ), that the property was suitable for a maximum advance, but, recommended engaging a responsible timber specialist. R, believing that the property was worth the offer they made and in the absence of any reference to substantial defects or insistence upon a retention, proceeded with the purchase. A few months later R found fungus in a wall, skirting board and cupboard. On consulting Rentokil, an estimate of £2,838 + VAT was quoted for remedial work. The point at issue was whether or not H had been negligent. QBD held that he had. Having found a certain amount of rot, he should have "foll
650			_aDUTY OF CARE
650			_aLIABILITY
650			_aMORTGAGES
650			_aMOULD GROWTH
690			_aMANAGEMENT-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT-PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c10753 _d10753