Claims we handle
We act for buyers, homeowners, investors, developers and lenders in claims against certified practising valuers and building and pest inspectors.
- Defects missed in a pre-purchase building inspection report
- Termite and timber pest damage not identified or not properly flagged
- Structural movement, slab heave or cracking dismissed as cosmetic
- Water ingress, defective waterproofing and balcony or shower failures
- Overvaluation causing a buyer to overpay or a lender to over-advance
- Failure to recommend further specialist investigation where the evidence called for it
- Boundary, measurement, site-area or zoning errors affecting value or development potential
- Non-compliant or combustible cladding not reported where it was visible
Scope is everything
The first question is what you engaged the professional to do. A mortgage valuation is a limited exercise carried out for the lender. A pre-purchase inspection to AS 4349.1 covers readily accessible areas visually, and expressly excludes what cannot be seen without damaging the building.
Standard caveats and exclusions are tested rather than accepted at face value. A professional cannot rely on boilerplate to disclaim something a competent practitioner should plainly have seen and reported.
Building the evidence
These claims turn on expert evidence. We instruct an independent valuer or inspector to attend the property, report on what a competent professional should have found at the time of the original inspection, and quantify the difference in value.
Photographs, repair quotes, strata records, contemporaneous notes and the conveyancing file all help. If the defect has already been rectified, keep the invoices and any pre-repair images.
Signs of valuer or inspector negligence
- A significant defect appeared shortly after settlement that the report never mentioned
- Repair quotes are far beyond anything the report prepared you for
- Another inspector says the problem would have been visible on inspection
- The valuation was materially out of line with comparable sales at the time
- The report recommended no further investigation despite obvious warning signs