Webb Resolutions Ltd v E.Surv Ltd [2012] EWHC 3653 (TCC) was one of a series of claims brought by acquirers of distressed mortgage books against the valuers whose reports had supported the original lending. The valuations were said to be overstated, and after borrower defaults and repossessions the lender, or its assignee, sought to recover the shortfall from the valuer.
The court applied the established framework: identify the true value, apply the permissible bracket, and only then ask whether the valuation was negligent. Several of the valuations were found to be outside the bracket and negligent. The court also examined the lender's own conduct, including its lending criteria and the loan-to-value ratios it was prepared to accept, when assessing contributory negligence and the measure of recoverable loss.
A recurring feature of the post-2008 valuation claims is that the lender's lending practices are put in issue. Where a lender advanced at a high loan-to-value ratio, or relaxed its criteria, a court may reduce the recoverable damages to reflect the lender's share of responsibility for its own loss. This is a live part of the defence, not a peripheral one.
Webb Resolutions illustrates how residential valuation claims are actually fought, from the bracket to the lender's conduct. Apex sets out how these features affect cover on its surveyors' PI guide, and the connected agency exposures on the estate and letting agents' PI guide. The defence of a valuation claim is rarely a single question; it is a sequence of them.
Claims of the Webb Resolutions type are rarely about a single valuation. An acquirer of a distressed mortgage book may challenge many valuations at once, and each one has to be assessed on its own facts: the true value, the permissible bracket, whether the figure fell outside it, and whether reasonable skill and care was exercised. A book claim therefore resolves into a series of individual defences, some of which will succeed and some of which will not.
Layered on top is the lender-conduct analysis. Where the lending was at a high loan-to-value ratio or on relaxed criteria, contributory negligence can reduce the recoverable loss on each valuation. For the firm and its insurer, this means the net exposure is often materially lower than the sum first claimed, but establishing that requires disclosure of the lender's underwriting and careful expert work. Aggregation wording again matters, because how the many valuations group together affects the application of the limit and the excess across the whole claim.
Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Firm reference number 724952. This entry is general information, not advice on any particular policy.