Whether it was a solicitor, surveyor, accountant, or financial adviser — we help you understand whether you have a claim and what to do next in London.
Select the profession to get targeted guidance for your negligence claim.
Missed deadlines or poor advice
Learn moreMissed serious property defects
Learn moreTax errors or negligent audits
Learn moreUnsuitable investments or pensions
Learn moreDesign defects or mismanaged projects
Learn moreUnclear whether negligence occurred
Learn moreUnderstand professional negligence principles, organise your evidence, and get clear next steps.
A professional negligence solicitor assesses your case and handles the claim process. No upfront cost.
No win, no fee — you only pay if you win
London has the UK's largest concentration of solicitors, surveyors, accountants, financial advisers, and architects, and correspondingly the highest volume of professional negligence claims. The city's high property values mean that a surveyor's missed defect or a solicitor's missed deadline can cause losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds. The financial services sector in the City and Canary Wharf generates significant financial advice negligence claims, while the West End's creative and media industries see regular intellectual property and contract disputes involving professional advisers.
London's property market drives a substantial volume of conveyancing and surveyor negligence claims. Missed defects in central London properties — subsidence, lease restrictions, planning issues, or service charge disputes — can cost buyers tens or hundreds of thousands. The City's financial services sector generates claims against IFAs, pension advisers, and wealth managers for unsuitable investment advice, particularly involving high-risk or unregulated investments. The city's large construction sector around major developments creates architect and project manager negligence claims where design defects or project mismanagement cause significant cost overruns.
A surveyor undertaking a HomeBuyer Report on a Kensington property failed to identify active subsidence cracking that was visible on external walls. The buyer completed the purchase and subsequently faced £85,000 in underpinning costs. The surveyor argued the cracking was "cosmetic" and outside the scope of a HomeBuyer Report.
A conveyancing solicitor failed to identify a lease restriction prohibiting subletting in a Canary Wharf apartment purchased as a buy-to-let investment. The buyer discovered the restriction two years after purchase, rendering the investment strategy unviable and significantly reducing the property's value.
An independent financial adviser in Mayfair recommended an unregulated collective investment scheme to a retired client with a low-risk profile. The investment failed, losing 70% of the capital. The IFA had failed to conduct adequate due diligence or document the suitability assessment.
London's key industries include financial services (Canary Wharf and the City), professional services (the West End and Midtown), property and construction (across Greater London), creative and media (Soho and Shoreditch), and tech and fintech (Old Street and King's Cross).
Yes, if the subsidence was visible and should have been identified during the survey. The scope of the survey matters: a basic mortgage valuation provides minimal structural assessment, while a building survey should identify significant structural issues. If the cracking was visible on external walls, if doors and windows showed signs of sticking, or if there was evidence of historic underpinning, a competent surveyor should have identified the risk. The claim would be for the cost of remedial work, any reduction in property value, and associated costs. The surveyor's defence that the cracking was "cosmetic" is challengeable if the signs were indicative of structural movement.
Conveyancing solicitors have a duty to identify and advise on all material restrictions in the lease. A restriction prohibiting subletting is clearly material to a buy-to-let purchase, and a competent solicitor should have identified it, reported it to you, and advised on its implications. If the solicitor missed this restriction and you suffered loss — whether through inability to sublet, reduced property value, or the cost of lease variation — you have a strong claim for professional negligence. Documentary evidence of what the solicitor did and did not report is crucial.
Not every investment loss is negligence. However, if the adviser recommended an investment that was unsuitable for your risk profile, failed to explain the risks, did not conduct adequate due diligence, or recommended an unregulated scheme without proper warnings, this may constitute negligence. The key questions are: was the investment suitable for someone with your circumstances and objectives? Did the adviser properly assess and document suitability? Were you given clear and accurate information about the risks? If the answer to any of these is no, you may have a claim.
We use cookies to improve your experience, analyse traffic, and personalise content.
You can accept or reject non-essential cookies. Privacy Policy
Essential Cookies
Always ActiveRequired for the site to function. Includes authentication, payment processing (Stripe), and saving your progress. Cannot be disabled.
Analytics Cookies
Help us understand how visitors use our site so we can improve it. Data is anonymised and never sold to third parties.
Marketing Cookies
Used to show you relevant content and measure the effectiveness of our communications. You can opt out at any time.