Our experience in professional negligence

  • Acting for clients in relation to a claim valued in the region of £0.5 million against surveyors who had negligently failed to identify fundamental problems with the structural integrity of the client’s property in a survey prior to purchase.
  • Acting in a claim against accountants for negligent advice in relation to the tax consequences of a multi-million pound share buy-back.
  • Acting against a firm of surveyors relating to the negligent valuation of a residential property where the surveyors had failed to identify the correct structure resulting in the over-valuation of the property at the time of the client’s purchase.
  • Acting for a family where the husband (and father) died as a result of the negligence of a well-known hospital. The claim is ongoing with value in excess of £400,000.
  • Acting for a client who had commenced high court proceedings seeking substantial damages from his former solicitor and barrister for allegedly negligent advice given to him to settle a complicated commercial claim.
  • Acting in a claim against solicitors who acting in the administration of an estate had negligently advised the beneficiaries that the deceased’s shares could not be sold until a grant of probate was obtained.
  • Acting against a mortgage lender relating to the repossession sale of the client’s residential property at an undervalue estimated to be in the region of £130,000.
  • Negotiating a settlement of a claim against a firm of solicitors for negligent advice in relation to a conveyancing transaction. The case involved the clients being unable to use part of their accommodation as residential and was rigorously defended on complex causation and planning issues.
  • Acting for a national charity against a nationally recognised firm of surveyors for negligent planning advice and applications over the course of two years in relation to one of the charity’s properties.
  • Acting for a client whose solicitors had failed to identify planning conditions severely restricting the intended business use of the property.  The problem only came to light after significant investment in the business and premises.  A settlement was reached without court proceedings being required.