000			01354cab a2200253 4500
001			ABS47751
008			090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u63323
041			_aeng
245			_aKerridge and another v James Abbott and Partners
260			_c1992
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1992) 48 EG 111-117(7)
520			_aQBD 16 July 1992. K put an offer of £145,000 on a house which was accepted, K then instructed J to carry out a full structural survey. J recommended that the woodworm found during the survey be treated by a specialist firm. Purchase of the property was completed at a price of £140,000. K appointed a firm to carry out the woodworm treatment and considerable work to the roof was also undertaken. Four years later dry rot was diagnosed - further work was carried out costing £90,000, plus fees of £25,000. K contended that a probability of dry rot in concealed timbers should have arisen in J`s report. It was "held" that J was not liable for negligence.
650			_aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING PATHOLOGY-INFESTATION (FUNGAL)-FUNGI-DRY ROT
650			_aNEGLIGENCE
650			_aSTRUCTURAL SURVEY
650			_aSURVEYORS
650			_aWARNING
650			_aWOODWORM
690			_aMANAGEMENT-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT-PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c39374 _d39374