The valuation is the ceiling on your whole deal — every leverage number the lender quoted becomes a percentage of whatever this document says. Yet most borrowers meet the valuation process for the first time when it goes wrong. This guide explains what's being produced, why it comes in lower than you hoped, and what you can legitimately do about it.
Whose document it is
Start with the uncomfortable part: the valuer is instructed for the lender, owes their duty of care to the lender, and is answering the lender's question — not yours. That question is broadly: what would this asset achieve, and how quickly could we sell it if everything went wrong? Understand that framing and every conservative number in the report makes sense.
The bases you'll meet
Open market value is the headline: the price between willing parties with proper marketing time. Beneath it sit the restricted bases lenders actually lean on — the 180-day value, assuming a six-month sales window, which typically shaves 10–15% off open market; and the 90-day value, assuming a rapid sale, which can cut deeper still. Many bridging lenders base leverage on the 180-day figure for anything unusual, which is why "75% LTV" can quietly mean 65% of the number you had in mind. Tenanted commercial assets may get a vacant possession value too — what it's worth empty — because the lender wants to know their position if the tenant leaves. And reinstatement value, the rebuild cost for insurance, has nothing to do with market value at all; on some commercial buildings it's dramatically higher, and your insurance must match it.
What caps a valuation
A property currently listed for sale gets capped at its own guide price almost without exception — the valuer will not argue that your property is worth more than you're publicly asking for it. Short leases cap value and, worse, lender appetite. Condition caps through the cost-to-cure: the valuer deducts what a purchaser would spend. Thin comparable evidence caps by forcing conservatism — where only three similar sales exist, the valuer anchors to the worst of them, not the best. And structural issues, cladding questions or non-standard construction can shift the whole report from valuation to survey-with-caveats, which lenders read as risk.
Down-valuations: what actually works
Outrage doesn't. Evidence sometimes does. A valuer will reconsider in the face of transactions they missed — a genuinely comparable sale completing last month, planning consent they weren't shown, works evidence with invoices rather than estimates. Send the evidence through the lender, calmly, as new information rather than as a complaint. Adjustments happen; reversals are rare; and sometimes the right response is accepting that the valuer has told you something true about your deal that you didn't want to hear. The number you paid is not evidence of value. The market is.
Reading the report like a lender
When the report lands, borrowers read one number and stop. Lenders read four sections, and so should you. The saleability commentary and estimated marketing period — because a six-to-nine-month marketing opinion quietly reprices a six-month term. The condition caveats — every "subject to" is a potential retention or requisition. The comparable schedule — check the valuer actually saw the sales you supplied; reports are assembled fast and evidence does get missed, which is exactly the gap a polite challenge can fill. And the reinstatement figure — your insurance must match it from day one, because the lender's solicitor will check the policy against the report at completion, and a mismatch there has delayed more completions than any title defect. One more mechanic worth knowing: on purchases, most lenders lend against the lower of price and valuation. A report above your purchase price is comforting but doesn't increase the advance; below it, the gap is yours.
AVMs and desktops
Automated valuations — model-driven, no visit — are increasingly accepted on straightforward residential at sensible leverage, and they remove a week from every timeline. Their limit is character: anything unusual, altered, mixed-use or works-laden needs human eyes, and pushing an AVM past its competence just moves the surprise to the audit later. As of July 2026 the practical rule across our panel: vanilla and under 70% loan-to-value, expect an AVM offer; anything with a story, expect a visit.
Meet the valuer as if they were the buyer. Access sorted, works costed on paper, comparables printed, planning documents in hand. You can't argue a valuer up — their opinion is professional and evidence-based — but you can make certain that opinion is formed on the complete evidence: the comparable they weren't shown and the consent they didn't know existed produce a conservative report that better briefing would have avoided. Nearly every unnecessary down-valuation we see is really a briefing failure.