000			01210cab a2200229 4500
001			WB2421-39
008			090401t1988 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u25526
041			_aeng
245			_aMundic block not detected during survey
260			_c1988
350			_a0
490			_aEGCS _v(1988) 73
520			_aIn Marder and Another v Sautelle and Hicks (a firm) , CA 4 May 1988, the firm of surveyors sought leave to appeal against the previous decision and to adduce fresh evidence . The firm had been held liable in negligence for carrying out a survey of a bungalow , the outer walls of which had been constructed with Mundic blocks. The survey failed to note this and consequently damages were awarded to the purchasers on the basis of the difference in the value of the bungalow with and without the known defects , namely £19,500. Shortly after the trial the purchasers sold the property for £70,000. Firm`s appeal dismissed and application to adduce fresh evidence refused.
650			_aBUILDING DEFECTS
650			_aLIABILITY
650			_aMORTGAGE VALUATIONS
650			_aSTRUCTURAL SURVEYS
690			_aPROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c17143 _d17143