Not upheld: property valuation dispute - irresponsible lending decision complaint against National Westminster Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained about a £95,000 valuation on his property conducted by a RICS-registered valuer instructed by NatWest when he applied for additional borrowing of £25,000. Mr C argued the valuation was too low, citing three estate agent valuations over £110,000 and a previous offer above that amount. He requested a second valuation, disclosure of comparable sales data, and compensation. The ombudsman found it reasonable for NatWest to rely on the qualified valuer's opinion, which contained no obvious errors, and noted that lenders are entitled to make commercial decisions about their lending policies. The ombudsman also observed that Mr C's existing five-year fixed-rate mortgage (expiring 2029) would have prevented him from switching products regardless of the valuation outcome. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman considered it reasonable for a lender to rely on the expert opinion of a qualified RICS-registered valuer unless there was an obvious error, which was not present here. The ombudsman noted that lenders are entitled to make commercial decisions about their lending policies and processes, and that it is not the ombudsman's role to replace the valuer's opinion or assess the valuer's actions. Additionally, even if the valuation had been higher, Mr C would have been unable to switch products before 2029 due to an early repayment charge on his existing fixed-rate mortgage.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website