ABSTRACT
It is nearly 20 years since a High Court Judge expressed astonishment when a surveyor, giving evidence concerning a survey which he had carried out, could not produce any site notes having dictated his report directly at the time of his inspection with the use of a hand held recorder. The introduction of recorders followed by the laptop and their almost universal use has, it might be thought, finally abolished the need for the type of traditional notes usually made by writing on sheets of paper on a clipboard. This is, in fact, by no means the case. The sacrifice of site notes has never really been regarded as a desirable modification in procedure but one driven by the need to save time and consequently, money. Although an understandable step to take when the surveyor was under a strict deadline from a prospective buyer in the case of, say, a dwelling being submitted to auction, too much is lost if this practice is adopted on a regular basis. Time for that important reflection on the outcome of the inspection, should the inspection itself not have produced a fully clear cut overall impression on the surveyor's mind is, inevitably, forgone. Sorting out the notes in whatever way they have been taken is a beneficial step towards providing a rounded and conclusive report, quite different in form from that criticised by the judge in the case of Watts v Morrow (1990) referred to above. Here, the report dictated on site without the taking of notes was said by the Judge to be ‘lengthy and diffuse’ and ‘its conclusions inadequate, strong on immediate detail but excessively and negligently weak on reflective thought’. Despite rumbles of discontent from some surveyors on the grounds that immediate impressions on site were preferable to racking the brain over notes less than fully adequate and concocting the report from a memory somewhat dim and hazy, the judgment made an impact and was taken to heart in professional circles.
