Citation
Hoxley, M. (2003), "Surveyors under fire - again", Structural Survey, Vol. 21 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/ss.2003.11021aaa.001
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2003, MCB UP Limited
Surveyors under fire - again
Surveyors under fire - again
Yet another Which? Report on the failings of residential surveyors has been published (Which?, 2002). It makes depressing reading and is critical not only of the standard of competence of surveyors but also of the RICS complaints-handling procedures. It has to be said that the sample on which the Consumers Association based their findings was a highly biased one. They advertised in the national press for people who had experienced problems with a domestic survey, sent out 232 questionnaires and received 80 usable responses. Of course, to counter-balance these 80 (or even 232) there must be many thousands of satisfied clients but to any profession worthy of the name 80 is 80 too many dissatisfied customers.
The RICS has acted swiftly to address some of the issues raised in the report. In response to criticism that the public are confused about which survey to opt for, a pamphlet Understanding Property Surveys was published within weeks if not days of the publication of the Which? Report. RICS (2002) offers detailed guidance on why a lender's valuation should not be relied upon and whether it is best to arrange for a homebuyer's or a building survey. It also offers advice on the RICS complaints-handling process. Following feedback from members a slightly amended publication will be issued shortly.
Some of the individual cases referred to in the Which? Report suggest that things have not moved on much since Malcolm Hollis' Channel 4 Dispatches programme reported in this Journal in 1999 (Hollis and Bright, 1999; Hollis, 1999). At that time Professor Hollis received much criticism for highlighting the shortcomings of elements of the profession. The latest publication from the Consumers Association suggests that the profession has not really learned much in the intervening years and that Hollis's concerns were justified.
Small wonder, then, that Reyers reports in a paper in this issue that professional indemnity insurers consider the work of residential surveyors to be more than nine times as risky as the work of a quantity surveyor.
The home condition report
The above discussion is even more depressing, given the tremendous opportunities that impending changes in legislation will present to the surveying profession. The seller's pack and home condition report (HCR) are firmly back on the agenda following the Queen's Speech in November. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister engaged in a tendering exercise in December for a technical pilot of the draft HCR. Provided that this goes well, the government is likely to proceed with consumer testing of the report on actual transactions later this year.
Although we are some years away from the full introduction of the seller's pack, the industry is starting to gear itself up for the changes and for the large numbers of additional surveyors required. The large corporates are reported to be recruiting at technician level and training these new staff up to carry out inspections. I wonder if this is the correct approach. If the high profile failings of recent years have taught us anything, surely it is that what is required from residential surveyors is a more professional approach to their work.
Editorial advisory board meeting
Peter Fall, the RICS president, very kindly hosted a well attended meeting of the board in his flat at RICS HQ in September 2002. At this fruitful meeting, several important matters were discussed. The tension between the professional and academic nature of the Journal was discussed and there was a lengthy debate about a possible change of name for the Journal. More on this in a later issue.
You will be reading this well into 2003 but I am actually writing it on New Year's Day - so a Happy New Year to all our readers!
Mike Hoxley
ReferencesHollis, M. (1999), "Survey of surveys: dampness", Structural Survey, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 138-42.Hollis, M. and Bright, K. (1999), "Surveying the surveyors", Structural Survey, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 65-73.RICS (2002), Understanding Property Surveys, RICS Residential Property Faculty, London.Which? (2002), "Surveys that don't give you the hole picture", Which? Report, July, pp. 8-11.