Surveyor Ombudsman Ian Smith launched his first annual report yesterday with recommendations that will affect chartered surveyors, their clients and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) in Scotland.  The pilot Surveyor Ombudsman Scheme was launched in Scotland in January 2004. The scheme was set up to give property clients an independent, impartial and free source of redress if they were unhappy with the service they had received from chartered surveyors.

Since the scheme launched, Surveyor Ombudsman Ian Smith has received 51 cases from members of the public who were unhappy with the service they had received. Cases referred to the scheme included complaints of surveyors overlooking dry rot, asbestos, and subsidence; of mis-selling, conflicts of interest, and poor management of building projects.
Due to the scheme’s terms of reference, only nine of these cases were able to be formally investigated by the Ombudsman’s office. In all cases determined, he has awarded financial compensation. Many familiar patterns emerged, leading the report to make a series of recommendations to chartered surveyors and the RICS.

Ian Smith commented:  'Since the scheme was launched, I believe that I have been effective in challenging long-established business practices and in persuading surveying firms to re-examine the way in which they serve their clients. In every case I have tried to be fair to both sides – the complainant and the surveyor – and to listen to each party’s views. This report provides both RICS and its members with food for thought when shaping the future direction of consumer redress in the property industry.'

Among the areas that the report highlighted were:

1. Plain English: the Surveyor Ombudsman highlighted the need for surveyors to report in ‘Plain English’ so that clients understand the likely implications of any defects that are reported, and to avoid unrealistic expectations or confusion.

2. Poor communication: the involvement of other intermediaries in the property process (legal and financial advisors) often means that there is no direct contact between surveyors and their clients. The Surveyor Ombudsman found that this led to situations where clients were not properly briefed on the service they were receiving (including details of the mandatory complaints handling procedures) before instructing the service. At best this lead to confusion on both sides and, at worst, left consumers not knowing where to turn if things went wrong.

3. RICS rules: The RICS rules and regulations are confusing for both RICS members and members of the public. They should be simplified, clarified, kept up-to-date and consistently enforced. RICS members need more support and clearer guidance from the RICS to understand the rules and regulations.

4. Endemic or systematic failures: Whilst examples of casual administration, poor record keeping, carelessness and out-of-date procedures were evident, no endemic or deliberate systematic failings were found.

Surveyor Ombudsman Ian Smith has stressed that in some cases householders were also to blame: 'People use the Stage One survey and think they are buying something for themselves, when in fact the bank or building society is getting some comfort about the value of the property. Detailed information about the condition of the property is not really part of the deal and that confuses people.'

He believes that the scheme is of benefit to all involved and should be rolled-out to the rest of the UK:  'Dealing with the fall-out when things go wrong can be a time-consuming and stressful process for all parties. Consumers and chartered surveyors have said that they found the involvement of an impartial third party very useful for bringing problems to a speedy and satisfactory conclusion. It has been an interesting and rewarding experience and one which I believe has been of benefit to all concerned.
'My experiences speaking to people outside Scotland also leads me to believe that there is a case for extending the scheme to the rest of the UK and I hope that my report will help to achieve this aim.'

Graeme Hartley, Director of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) in Scotland, believes that the Surveyor Ombudsman Scheme has given the profession food for thought:
'We welcome the Surveyor Ombudsman’s first annual report. It marks the end of the first year of a very successful pilot which has now been extended in Scotland while we explore possible future developments.
'The Ombudsman has made recommendation on only a very small number of cases so it is impossible for us to draw any statistically significant conclusions from those. But we do know that, aside from these few cases, the Ombudsman has also helped chartered surveyor firms in Scotland to improve their complaints handling. This can only be of benefit to both consumers and RICS members since the holy grail for all parties must be early complaint resolution.'

The report’s launch comes less than one month after Sir Bryan Carsberg published his review into the regulatory role of RICS. As well as highlighting a need for a compliance regime that is easier for members to comply with but remains effective, Carsberg recommended that a Property Ombudsman service should be established across the UK.
Steven Gould, RICS’ Director of Professional Regulation and Consumer Protection, said that the Institution would consider the Surveyor Ombudsman’s report alongside Carsberg’s findings:
'RICS has extended the pilot while it considers how best to implement Sir Bryan Carsberg’s recommendations on redress. Not only has Carsberg recommended the extension of the Surveyor Ombudsman Scheme to the rest of the UK but he has also suggested that RICS should investigate and take the lead in building a broad Property Ombudsman service for the UK.
'Such a scheme might encompass not just surveying but also estate agency, residential letting, new houses, home inspections under the Single Survey (Scotland) or the Housing Act (England and Wales). This could involve both bringing together existing redress mechanisms and establishing new ones. Experience with the Surveyor Ombudsman indicates that such a scheme would be good for all stakeholders and provide consumers with the clarity the sector currently lacks.'

Sources : RICS

Report in full : Surveyor Ombudsman Scheme