The lender obtained judgment for a monetary sum against the borrowers. It then pursued a professional negligence claim against the valuer who initially valued the property. The valuation proceedings were settled. The lender sought to bankrupt the borrower. The borrowers argued the lender could not claim the full amount from them as it had the benefit of the settlement with the valuer.
The trial judge did not accept that argument as it was clear the valuer did not intend to discharge the liabilities of the borrowers. Therefore, a sequestration order was made.
The borrowers appealed the decision. They argued that the lender should not be allowed to double dip. Justice Siopis held the lender was not double dipping because under the settlement deed any amount recovered from the borrower over a certain sum was required to be accounted to the valuer.