01332 314039

234 Derby Road, Derby DE73 6RU

8.30am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday


Part 35 CPR Expert Reports For Court




Dear M F


25 Derby, DE21




To prepare an expert report in accordance with Part 35 of the Civil Procedure rules for use in Court proceedings in connection with a contract for the recovering of a  roof.




I am Steven John Macgregor Butler, a Member of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyor trading as a sole practitioner. I qualified in 1992 and have in excess of twenty years’ experience of surveying residential properties and preparing reports on defective workmanship.


The dispute relates to a contract to recover the roof at the above property as a result of a leak following which it still leaks and there is other evidence of defective workmanship.

The property is a semi-detached house constructed about 1985. It has cavity brick faced walls and a pitched concrete tile roof. The roof has a small decorative gable projection over the small front bedroom window.


Mr F claims:

that he first approached the defendant because the small bedroom ceiling was leaking below the decorative gable.

that following a failure of a repair by the defendant the defendant was approached again and this time advised that the whole of the roof required recovering including replacing the battens that the tiles hang on and the under sheet. The removed tiles were to be re-used.


Remedial Works

The ridge tiles will require removing and re-bedding on replacement

The tiles on the front elevation and gable will require removing, damaged ones say ten percent to be set aside, and correctly replacing. The replacement tiles will not match due to weathering etc and may look unsightly. Additionally the type of tile which is believed to be a Redland Stonewold is no longer made. Obtaining tiles may thus be difficult. It may be necessary to replace all the tiles on the front elevation and inert a divider where they meet the attached property above the party wall.

The edges of the valleys will require repointing.


It is considered that the original problem of the leak of the gable could have been repaired at a cost of in the region of £500.00

It is considered that the roof could have been pressure washed including scaffold for £500.00 or £250.00 if done using the same access equipment as for the gable repair.

I have not estimated to cost or removing the tiles and recovering the roof as it was completely unnecessary.

It is considered that the existing that the front elevation of the roof and gable can be recovered allowing for about ten percent of the tiles having to be renewed at a cost of circa £2000.00  If is it necessary to purchase a set of tiles for the whole of the front roof then these might cost in the region of  £300.00.


The origin leak required only a localised repair with minimum disturbance of the roof.

Complete recovering of the roof and completely replacing the felt and battens was not necessary.

The defendant did not recover the rear elevation of the roof, replace the felt or battens. About £2000.00 of work in the contract was not done.

It will be necessary to strip the roof make good the battens and lining and then recover with tiles of the correct specification.

Repairs including cleaning the roof could have been affected for about £750.00.

Replacing one face of the roof due to the previous poor recovering will be about £2000.00 if the tiles can be recovered or £2400.00 if new tiles are required.


Statement of Truth

This report is prepared in accordance with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Expert Witness Practice Statement.

I, Steven John MacGregor Butler, declare that:

i.          I understand that my duty in providing written reports and giving evidence is to help the Court, and that this duty overrides any obligation to the party who has engaged me, or the party who has paid or is liable to pay me. I confirm that I have complied with this duty and will continue to comply with this duty.

ii.         I confirm that I have made clear which facts and matters referred to in this report are within my own knowledge and which are not.  Those that are within my own knowledge I confirm to be true.  The opinions I have expressed represent my true and complete professional opinions on the matters to which they refer.

iii.        I have endeavoured to include in my report those matters which I have knowledge of or which I have been made aware that might adversely affect the validity of my opinion. I have clearly stated any qualifications to my opinion.

iv.        I confirm that I am aware of the requirements of Civil Procedures Rule 35, Practice Direction 35, of the Civil Justice Protocol for the Instruction of Expert to Give Evidence in Civil Claims and the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct.

v.         This report has been prepared in accordance with the Code of Practice for Experts.

vi.        I have indicated the sources of all information I have used.

vii.       I have not, without forming an independent view, included or excluded anything which has been suggested to me by others (in particular my instructing lawyers).

viii.      I will notify those instructing me immediately and confirm in writing if for any reason my existing report requires any correction of qualification.

ix.        I understand that:

a.         my report, subject to any corrections before swearing as to its correctness, will form the evidence be given under oath or affirmation 

b.         I may be cross-examined on my report by a cross-examiner assisted by an expert. 

c.         I am likely to be the subject of public adverse criticism by the Judge if the Judge concludes that I have not taken reasonable care in trying to meet the standards set out above.

x.         I confirm that I have not entered into any arrangements where the amount or payment of my fees is in any way dependent upon the outcome of the case.                            

Signed                                                                         Dated


SJM Butler                                                              7th August 2017







Broken Tiles




Poor overlap


The cement at the side of the valley is old suggesting that the tiles have not been removed



Minor damage to the under felt




Mismatched pointing.



Poor spacing and pointing of the ridge tiles. Some pointing has already come away




Poor overlaps and chips.