When the quantity surveyor prices the job higher than the borrower did

A single-director company came to us to buy a mixed-use block: a retail unit and a one bedroom flat at ground level, with three letting rooms and a studio flat above. The plan was a straightforward internal refurbishment — kitchens, bathrooms, flooring and decoration — with no change to the layout and no planning required. The borrower had costed the works at around £75k.

Our monitoring surveyor priced the same schedule at £100k — a third higher than the borrower’s estimate. That is exactly what the initial report is for. A borrower who starts a refurbishment £25k short does not finish it, and a lender who funds the optimistic figure ends up with a half-finished building. We funded the surveyor’s number instead, drawn in arrears against inspection as the work completed.

The director’s headline credit score came back at 660 — flagged as high risk by the bureau. Rather than decline on the number, we asked for a full multi-agency report. It showed clean conduct across every account. The score reflected a thin file rather than anything adverse, and the borrower — a construction site manager by trade — had already bought, refurbished and let a property of his own, adding around £40k of value in the process. Experience and evidence beat a headline score.

• An initial surveyor’s report that corrected the cost plan before work started, not after.
• Insight A borrower whose day job and previous project matched what he was proposing to do.
• A full valuation and monitoring surveyor throughout, with funds released against inspection.