Surveyors told to use plain English

Firsst ombudsman's report tells surveyors to improve communication skills

News, 26 April 2005

Surveyors in Scotland have been urged to simplify their rules and speak in "plain English".

Ian Smith, the profession's ombudsman, made the recommendations in his first annual report released yesterday.

The pilot Surveyor Ombudsman Scheme was launched in Scotland in January 2004 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 then Mr Smith has received 51 cases from members of the public who were unhappy with the service they had received. These 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.

Mr Smith said: “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:

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.

Poor communication: the involvement of other intermediaries in the property process (legal and financial advisers) often means that there is no direct contact between surveyors and their clients. The 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.

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.

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.

Mr Smith believes that the scheme is of benefit to all involved and should be rolled out to the rest of the UK:

“Dealing with the fallout 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.”

A review of regulation and redress in the property industry by Sir Bryan Carsberg, former Director General of the Office of Fair Trading, published earlier this month also recommended extension of the Scottish scheme to the rest of the UK.