Skip to content
Search

RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK)

RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK)

The Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK) was setup by RICS to consider the unique events relating to the global COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on valuation assignments, with a focus on financial reporting and measures for the accurate and consistent reporting of material uncertainty. It comprises a group of expert valuers covering a wide range of asset classes and specialisms. The terms of reference are attached below.

RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK)  terms of reference

The forum meets weekly during events leading to the widespread use of material uncertainty clauses and produces a weekly UK summary output attached below. For transparency, each meeting output will remain available from the website or by request. Please refer to the relevant version. The output will assess material valuation uncertainty against a criteria published on the right of this page. The summary will comprise a short statement outlining the forum consensus opinion on markets where reporting material valuation uncertainty may no longer be appropriate. The summary will be binary and will not report on the weight of certainty in any particular market. The summary will not include a general market commentary and will only include additional information where necessary.

The outputs of the RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum are based on a high-level overview of market conditions, and necessarily cannot take into account factors applying to specific assets, regions or markets. RICS reminds regulated members that the decision whether to insert, maintain or remove commentary that a valuation is materially uncertain is that of the valuer, taking into account the specific attributes and performance of the individual asset and its market. Regulated members should consider on a case-by-case basis whether it would be appropriate to include commentary that a valuation is materially uncertain. They should have a sound rationale for the decision they reach upon such consideration and should maintain a record of that rationale for future reference. The views of the Leaders Forum are not a substitute for that process.

Neither RICS or any member of the Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK) accepts any responsibility, duty or liability to any party in respect of the contents of the Leaders Forum output. Any such responsibility, duty or liability is expressly disclaimed. RICS and the Leaders Forum shall therefore not be held accountable, either collectively or individually, for any losses relating to or arising out of a valuer’s decision to insert, maintain or remove any declaration of material valuation uncertainty.

Forum outputs

  • The RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK) met on 21 May 2020 to discuss material valuation uncertainty in UK real estate markets. The forum assessed this against the published criteria. There was a consensus that reporting material valuation uncertainty may no longer be appropriate for:

    (First recommended 14 May 2020)

    • long dated annuity income with at least 20-years unexpired term certain with a secure covenant such as government or very strong investment grade
    • standalone food stores let to major operators
    • institutional grade primary healthcare facilities

    (Additional recommendations 21 May 2020)

    • Non-reversionary residential ground rents (in excess of 80 years)
    • All types of rented social housing or leased shared ownership, owned by housing associations and valued on the basis of Existing Use Value for Social Housing (EUV-SH) only, and therefore assuming that all homes remain within the regulated, Registered Provider sector (but excluding social housing owned by local authorities where valued for Housing Revenue Account purposes under government guidance)


    The outputs of the RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK) are based on a high-level overview of market conditions, and necessarily cannot take into account factors applying to specific assets, regions or markets. RICS reminds regulated members that the decision whether to insert, maintain or remove commentary that a valuation is materially uncertain is that of the valuer, considering the specific attributes and performance of the individual asset and its market. Regulated members should consider on a case-by-case basis whether it would be appropriate to include commentary that a valuation is materially uncertain. They should have a sound rationale for the decision they reach upon such consideration and should maintain a record of that rationale for future reference. The views of the Leaders Forum are not a substitute for that process.

  • The RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK) met on 14 May 2020 to discuss material valuation uncertainty in UK real estate markets. The forum assessed this against the published criteria. There was a consensus that reporting material valuation uncertainty may no longer be appropriate for:

    • long dated annuity income with at least 20-years unexpired term certain with a secure covenant such as government or very strong investment grade
    • standalone food stores let to major operators
    • institutional grade primary healthcare facilities


    The outputs of the RICS Material Valuation Uncertainty Leaders Forum (UK) are based on a high-level overview of market conditions, and necessarily cannot take into account factors applying to specific assets, regions or markets. RICS reminds regulated members that the decision whether to insert, maintain or remove commentary that a valuation is materially uncertain is that of the valuer, considering the specific attributes and performance of the individual asset and its market. Regulated members should consider on a case-by-case basis whether it would be appropriate to include commentary that a valuation is materially uncertain. They should have a sound rationale for the decision they reach upon such consideration and should maintain a record of that rationale for future reference. The views of the Leaders Forum are not a substitute for that process.