Free RICS Complaint Template

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to complain about the conduct of the surveyor and/or firm identified below to the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). I am a current client of the surveyor and/or firm named below, in connection with a HomeBuyer Report (Level 2). I ask RICS to assess this complaint against the RICS Rules of Conduct 2022 and the RICS Bye-Laws, and to take such regulatory action as is appropriate.

This complaint concerns the surveyor and/or firm identified below, who are regulated by RICS.

The conduct I am complaining about is as follows:

I instructed Carrow Whitfield Surveyors Ltd to carry out a HomeBuyer Report (Level 2) on a 1930s semi-detached house I was buying at 7 Marlow Avenue, Manchester. The report dated 18 September 2025 rated the roof and the damp-proofing "1 — no repair currently needed". I relied on the report and completed the purchase in October 2025. Within six weeks of moving in, two roofing contractors and a damp specialist independently found extensive nail-sickness across the main roof slope (requiring a full re-covering) and rising damp to the rear elevation with perished plaster — both of which were visible on the day of the survey and ought to have been flagged at least as "3 — urgent". When I raised this with Mr Whitfield he was dismissive, said the report was "for guidance only", and did not address how a competent surveyor could have rated those elements "1". I am concerned the inspection was not carried out diligently and that the ratings were not properly justified.

I enclose or can provide the following in support of this complaint:

Enclosure 1: the HomeBuyer Report dated 18 September 2025. Enclosure 2: the terms of engagement. Enclosure 3: the roofing contractor reports (two firms, October-November 2025) with photographs of the nail-sickness. Enclosure 4: the damp specialist report with moisture readings. Enclosure 5: my email exchange with Mr Whitfield, November 2025.

Rule 3 requires members and firms to provide a good-quality and diligent service. A concern under Rule 3 is, for example, a careless survey or valuation, a failure to inspect properly, a failure to report a defect that a competent surveyor would have identified, or unreasonable delay.

How this rule applies to my complaint:
A competent surveyor carrying out a Level 2 HomeBuyer Report on a 1930s roof would have identified nail-sickness across the main slope — it was visible from the ground and the loft — and rated it at least "3 — urgent", with advice to obtain a roofing quotation before exchange. The same applies to the rising damp and perished plaster on the rear elevation. Rating both elements "1 — no repair currently needed" is not a service a reasonably diligent surveyor would have provided, and the inspection does not appear to have been carried out with proper care.

The RICS Rules of Conduct 2022 require members and firms to: (1) be honest, act with integrity and comply with their professional obligations; (2) maintain their professional competence and ensure services are provided by competent individuals; (3) provide a good-quality and diligent service; (4) treat others with respect and encourage diversity and inclusion; and (5) act in the public interest, take responsibility for their actions, and act to prevent harm.

Mandatory standards I say were breached:
The applicable standard is the RICS Home Survey Standard, which governs the Level 2 HomeBuyer Report, including the condition-rating methodology (ratings 1 to 3) and the duty to inspect those parts of the property that are reasonably accessible. The ratings given depart from that standard.

A RICS conduct complaint is a regulatory matter: RICS assesses whether the member or firm breached the Rules of Conduct and can impose a regulatory sanction, but it cannot award compensation for financial loss. A claim in professional negligence is a civil matter for the courts (or an RICS-approved redress scheme for consumer disputes), where damages for financial loss are recovered. A negligent valuation that breaches the Red Book, or a survey that falls below the RICS Home Survey Standard, can give rise to both a conduct complaint and a negligence claim.

This matter has both a conduct dimension (for RICS) and a financial-loss dimension (for a negligence claim or redress scheme). I am pursuing the conduct elements with RICS and the financial loss separately.

The financial loss I have suffered:
The roofing contractors estimate a full re-covering at £14,800; the damp remediation and replastering is quoted at £6,400. Had these been flagged, I would have renegotiated the price or withdrawn. My loss is the difference between the price paid and the value of the house in its true condition, plus the cost of the remedial works.

I am pursuing both routes in parallel — the conduct with RICS and the financial loss as a negligence / redress claim.

Every RICS-regulated firm must operate a published Complaints Handling Procedure (CHP) that includes an RICS-approved redress provider, and must keep a complaints log. For consumer clients the firm must belong to an RICS-approved redress scheme — typically The Property Ombudsman or the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) — which can investigate the complaint and direct a remedy.

I have completed, or attempted to complete, the firm's published Complaints Handling Procedure. The firm's RICS-approved redress scheme is The Property Ombudsman, to which I have referred (or will refer) the financial-loss element.

What happened with the firm's procedure:
I made a written complaint under the firm's Complaints Handling Procedure on 14 November 2025. The firm's response of 1 December 2025 maintained the ratings were "a matter of professional judgement" and did not engage with the contractor evidence. The CHP confirmed the firm's redress scheme is The Property Ombudsman, to which I am referring the financial-loss element in parallel with this conduct complaint.

RICS investigates conduct concerns under the RICS Bye-Laws and the Rules of Conduct 2022. Where the threshold is met, the matter may be referred to the RICS Regulatory Tribunal — a Single Member, a Disciplinary Panel, or an Appeal Panel on appeal. The sanctions available range from a caution or reprimand, through a fine, conditions and undertakings, to expulsion from RICS membership. RICS publishes its disciplinary decisions in the public interest.

Why this is serious:
This is not a borderline judgement call. Two independent roofing firms and a damp specialist found significant, visible defects that a competent Level 2 surveyor should have rated urgent; the surveyor rated them "no repair needed" and then declined to justify the ratings against the evidence. The combination of an inadequate inspection and an unjustified condition rating, with a substantial financial consequence, in my submission crosses the threshold for investigation and potentially for the Regulatory Tribunal.

On this complaint, I ask RICS to investigate the conduct against the RICS Rules of Conduct 2022 and the RICS Bye-Laws.

Any earlier proceedings on the same facts:
So far as I am aware, no RICS disciplinary proceedings have previously been brought against this surveyor or firm in connection with this matter. This is the first time the conduct has been reported.

I ask RICS to: (a) acknowledge this complaint; (b) assess the conduct against the RICS Rules of Conduct 2022; (c) investigate where the threshold is met; (d) keep me informed of the outcome so far as the RICS rules allow; and (e) tell me which RICS-approved redress scheme the firm belongs to so that I can pursue any financial loss.

The best way to contact me is at the address or email address at the head of this letter. I understand that RICS will process the personal data in this complaint under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 for its regulatory functions, and that it may need to share relevant parts of this complaint with the surveyor or firm to investigate it.

YOURS FAITHFULLY,