Definition

In an APC context, client care refers to the behaviours, processes and systems through which an RICS-regulated firm or individual surveyor ensures each client receives a fair, transparent and competent service throughout the lifecycle of an instruction. It is anchored in RICS Rule 3 (Service) (effective 2 February 2022), which requires members and firms to provide a quality service and act in the best interests of clients.

Why this matters for Client Care

  • Client care failures are the most frequently cited grounds for complaints to RICS and redress schemes; robust client care systems are both an ethical and risk-management imperative.
  • APC assessors test this competency at every level: at Level 1 you must understand the framework; at Level 2 you must evidence how you apply it.
  • Ensuring client care overlaps with every other mandatory competency; candidates who understand this interconnection present more convincingly at assessment.

Key principles

Written terms of engagement

Client care begins before the first piece of work is done. The surveyor must issue written terms of appointment setting out the scope, fee, programme, limitation of liability and complaints procedure. This document creates the shared understanding of what the client is entitled to expect.

Acting in the client's best interest

Throughout the instruction the surveyor must keep the client's objectives in view, not the convenience of the practice. This means providing timely advice even when unwelcome, recommending specialist input where expertise reaches its limit, and flagging any development that could materially affect the client's position.

Keeping clients informed

A communication plan agreed at the outset, specifying method and frequency of updates, dramatically reduces the risk of a complaint arising from silence rather than substance. Updates should be proactive; the surveyor should not wait for the client to ask before reporting material developments.

A complaints procedure that is accessible and effective

Every RICS-regulated firm must operate a complaints handling procedure signposted to clients in the terms of appointment, with a referral pathway to a redress scheme such as The Property Ombudsman or the RICS Dispute Resolution Service. Complaints should be treated as an opportunity to identify systemic improvements.

Relevant RICS guidance and legislation

  • RICS Rules of Conduct (effective 2 February 2022) — Rule 3 (Service) sets the overarching client care obligation for all members and firms.
  • RICS professional standard on complaints handling — mandatory for all regulated firms; requires a two-stage internal process and access to an approved redress scheme.
  • RICS Conflicts of Interest global professional statement (1st edition, 2017, effective 1 January 2018) — governs how conflicts must be managed to protect client interests.
  • Consumer Rights Act 2015 — where the client is a consumer, the service must be provided with reasonable care and skill and within a reasonable time.
  • The Property Ombudsman and RICS Dispute Resolution Service — both provide approved redress for clients who cannot resolve complaints directly with the firm.

Ethics and Rules of Conduct angle

Client care is most squarely anchored in Rule 3 (Service). Where it fails, Rule 1 (Honesty and Integrity) may be engaged if the failure involved concealment, and Rule 2 (Competence) is relevant where a surveyor accepted an instruction beyond their expertise.

APC-style Q&As

Q (Level 1) Which RICS Rule of Conduct most directly establishes the obligation to ensure client care?

Rule 3 (Service) requires that RICS members and firms provide a quality service and act in the best interests of clients, making it the primary rule underpinning the Client Care competency.

Q (Level 1) What is the minimum information a surveyor must provide to a client before starting work?

The surveyor must provide written terms of appointment covering at least the scope of services, the fee and payment terms, any limitation of liability, and details of the firm's complaints handling procedure and redress scheme, in accordance with the RICS Rules of Conduct and the professional standard on complaints handling.

Q (Level 2) A client has not responded to your two emails updating them on progress. How do you ensure your client care obligation is met?

(example) I would make a telephone call to check whether the emails had been received and whether the client had any concerns or queries. If there was no response, I would send a third written communication by an alternative method and record in the file that I had attempted contact on multiple occasions by multiple means. The obligation to keep the client informed rests with me, not with the client to chase; I need to be able to demonstrate that I discharged that obligation even where the client was unresponsive.

Q (Level 2) How would you identify a potential conflict of interest before accepting a new client instruction, and what steps would you take if one existed?

Before accepting a new instruction I would check the firm's conflict-of-interest register against the prospective client and any other parties identified in the brief. If a conflict was identified, I would assess whether it could be managed under the RICS Conflicts of Interest global professional statement or whether we must decline. I would document the check and outcome regardless.

Q (Level 3) A long-standing client pressures you to overlook an adverse finding in a survey report because they believe it will affect the sale price of their property. How do you ensure client care whilst maintaining your professional integrity?

(example) I would explain that omitting or softening a material finding would breach my professional duty to provide an accurate assessment and expose both parties to liability. Ensuring the client's best interest means providing honest advice even when unwelcome. I would retain the adverse finding in full, note the client's concern on file, and offer to discuss remediation options. If the client threatened to withdraw the instruction, I would accept that outcome rather than compromise the report's integrity.