Professional negligence claims in small claims court
Negligence is a legal test, not a feeling. All four must be present.
A professional you engaged owed you a duty to exercise the skill and care of a reasonably competent member of their profession.
Their work fell below that standard. Bolam test: would a reasonable body of competent practitioners in that field have done what they did?
Their breach caused your loss. But for their negligence, you would not have suffered the harm.
You suffered actual financial loss as a result. Inconvenience or distress alone is not enough.
Professional negligence claims in small claims court
The four elements you must prove
| Profession | Typical example |
|---|---|
| Accountant | Filed your tax return wrong, you paid HMRC penalties. |
| Surveyor | Missed serious defect in a pre-purchase survey, cost you tens of thousands to put right. |
| IT consultant | Built a website that did not work, charged £5,000, you had to pay someone else to redo it. |
| Architect | Designs failed planning permission, you wasted fees and time. |
| Conveyancer | Missed a restrictive covenant on title that affects what you can do with your property. |
The Bolam test in plain English
The standard isn’t whether the professional was the best in their field — it’s whether
a reasonable body of competent practitioners
in that profession would have done what they did. If yes, no negligence. If no — even if their action was within the range of acceptable practice — there may be a claim.
This is named after Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957], originally a medical case but now applied across all professions. It sets a high bar: novel approaches and judgement calls within the profession’s acceptable range are not negligent, even if they turn out badly.