Colley's Negligent Mortgage Valuation

rangerover1

Just wondering if there is anyone out there who has like me had a negligent mortgage valuation by Colley's surveyors. Myself & my partner own 4 properties and they were over valued in 2007 by 35% by Colleys on behalf of the Halifax & TMB. We have just had a retrospective valuation by a well respected RICS valuer which has confirmed our fears. We have written to Colley's who issued one letter which was also their 'Final Response'. Obviously, we know they are not going to admit liability when the total claim is hundreds of thousands. We have also heard on the grapevine recently that the surveyor in question (he valued all 4 of the properties) has been put on garden leave and we know there are many more claims against him. We are not going to back down on this matter, but would love to hear from anyone who is in the same situation.

kingstreet

This is very similar to another thread on here last week. In that case, the OP purchased land to develop a property but failed to secure access.

Why were Colleys valuing the properties?

Thrugelmir

rangerover1 wrote: »

which has confirmed our fears.

If you were actively engaged in the property market. I would assume that you had more knowledge than merely fears.

opinions4u

What is the nature of your complaint?

In what way have you lost out due to the "overvaluations"?

What were they for? Mortgage to buy? Remortgage?

holly_hobby

This sounds as though you have sought a remortgage on the 4 properties, the current surveyor has downvalued them, leading you to use the 2007 valuations as leverage to get todays valuations increased.

You say, that in discussing with the current surveyor, they claim (I would guess in defence of their own current valuation of the dwellings), that the original surveyor had overvalued them in 2007 by circa 35% .

Can I ask what basis and evidence, todays surveyor has made his as you say "retrospective" assessment and comments (apart from trying to defend his own down valuing) ? Did he go away and come back with such a figure ? Where exactly did he get the 35% fig from ?

Following on from Kings & O4U's posts (i.e purchase or remortgage, etc)

You say you have complained to Colleys regarding this matter, which they have rejected.

What exactly was your complaint (suspect you have cited a possible negative equity issue), and what exactly were their points of defence to the issues raised ?

What, in the event of a successful complaint, do you want Colleys to do to resolve the matter ?

I would just comment that the other cases you claim to know of "on the grapevine" are hearsay and may have no relevance, until full details are known and proven.

There are a number of issues here, if what you say is accurate ... the most exposed party at this point, being the mortgage lenders who are using the properties for security !

If you can give a few more details, we will try and help .. the next step would be to refer the matter to RICS (if a privately instructed survey), or the mortgagee if just basic surveys performed under their instruction, if Colleys have refused to engange in any further communication in the matter.

From the face of it, I don't think there is much mileage here - unless you had your own surveys performed, and it can be proven that if a different valuation fig at 2007 had come back, this would have disuaded you from the course of action taken (i.e either in purchasing or refinancing them to the level you have).

And that any neg equity case you seek to bring is as a sole result of the inaccurate valuations, and are in no way as a result of market movements in the prevailing 5 yrs since 2007 - which I think is doubtful (but we don't know all the info yet).

Hope this helps

Holly

bigadaj

Who were colleys working for in this case, ie did you commission them or did they supply a valuation to your mortgage provider, if the former then you might have a case, if the latter then their responsibility is to the mortgage provider, simply does the property value exceed their mortgage value.

poppy10_2

If you own 4 properties, presumably they are buy to let. As such you are a professional investor and should have done your own research before investing. The surveyor was acting for the lender, not you, and therefore had no duty of care to you. I don't think you'll have a claim for negligence here.

This recent Court of Appeals ruling should be of interest:

The judgment handed down by the Court of Appeal on 17 June 2011 held that a valuer acting for a lender did not owe a duty of care to a borrower where the loan was for a buy-to-let investment property.


Background
The case involved a development of new residential flats. Mr Scullion, the claimant, agreed to purchase a flat and made an application for finance from a specialist buy-to-let mortgage provider, Mortgages plc. A valuer employed by Colleys was instructed by Mortgages plc to provide a valuation report of the capital value and the anticipated rental value of the development.
After completion, Mr Scullion was only able to let the flat for half of the monthly value which Colleys had predicted. Mr Scullion made a claim against Colleys for negligence. Colleys defended the claim on various grounds, fundamentally that they did not owe Mr Scullion a duty of care.


The question to determine was whether a buy-to-let investor purchasing a property using finance from a specialist buy-to-let mortgage provider was owed a duty of care.


The Court of Appeal’s decision
In their judgment, a valuer would have likely believed that a buy-to-let purchaser would seek his own valuation advice and would not have concluded that Mr Scullion would rely upon their report.


Conclusion
The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Scullion’s claim against Colleys for negligence. The Court of Appeal held that a valuer did not owe a duty of care to a third-party buy-to-let investor in a transaction. There remains a distinction between "ordinary" purchasers of residential property and buy-to-let investors.

dunstonh

Myself & my partner own 4 properties and they were over valued in 2007 by 35% by Colleys on behalf of the Halifax & TMB.

Unless you can find a price tag on a property that is factual then any valuation is opinion. The market in 2007 is very different to today and lending criteria leading to valuation criteria would be different.

The lender is the one that may have an issue with the valuer. However, you dont. If you were sensible you would have obtained your own professional valuation if you were incapable of deciding for (and taking responsibility) for your own opinion on value.

DannyboyMidlands

Why didn't you use a well respected RICS valuer to give a second opinion the first time around? Was it because, at that time, a high valuation worked in your favour allowing you to take a bigger punt on the housing market? Sounds like you gambled, lost and are looking for somebody to blame.