Expert Determination Update
Expert Determination: a faster, expert-led way to resolve window and door disputes
When a window or door installation goes wrong, the dispute can escalate quickly. Either may feel they have no option other than legal action which can be lengthy and expensive.
There is a better route.
Expert Determination (ED) is a well-established form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in which the parties appoint an independent technical expert to decide the issue in dispute. In the right kind of case, ED is significantly faster and cheaper than court proceedings, and it keeps the focus on what matters most in glazing disputes: the technical facts.
What is Expert Determination?
Expert Determination is a private process where an independent expert reviews the evidence from both sides and issues a determination (a decision). ED is commonly used for disputes that turn on technical questions, rather than complex legal arguments.
Depending on what the parties agree at the outset, the determination can be binding, meaning it is intended to bring the matter to a close without further argument.
Why ED is particularly suited to window and door installation disputes
Most glazing disputes are not really “legal” problems at their core. They are technical problems, for example:
- Is the product the correct specification and size?
- Has the installation been carried out competently and in accordance with good practice?
- Are issues caused by installation, product manufacture, building movement, or maintenance?
- Do reported defects (leaks, draughts, distortion, operational issues, glazing unit failure) have identifiable causes and practical remedies?
- What is a fair and proportionate scope of remedial work?
These are precisely the kinds of questions an independent, competent fenestration expert is trained to assess. ED is designed for this: an expert-led decision on technical matters.
ED compared with legal proceedings: the practical benefits
1) Much faster outcomes
Court timetables can be slow (often years), and delays can increase costs and frustration on both sides. ED is typically structured to reach a decision promptly, because the process is designed around focused evidence and an expert’s review, rather than procedural litigation steps.
2) Much cheaper than litigation
Legal proceedings can become expensive quickly: solicitor correspondence, pleadings, disclosure, witness statements, expert reports, hearings, and the risk of adverse costs. ED is generally more proportionate, because it targets the technical dispute directly and reduces the number of moving parts.
3) Expert-led, not lawyer-led
In court, technical issues are often argued through lawyers, and the court may need to appoint or rely upon expert evidence anyway. In ED, the expert is the decision-maker, so the process is inherently aligned to resolving technical disputes efficiently.
4) Private and confidential
Unlike court proceedings (which can be public), ED is a private process. This is particularly valuable where a homeowner wants discretion, or where an installation business wants to avoid reputational harm from a public dispute.
5) Supports commercial relationships
Many disputes arise from miscommunication, incomplete expectations, or disagreement over the appropriate remedy. ED provides a clear technical outcome that can help parties move forward pragmatically—often preserving working relationships where that is desirable.
ED and the wider move toward ADR
Across England and Wales, ADR is increasingly promoted as a sensible step before litigation. Amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules that came into force on 1 October 2024 further embedded the promotion and use of ADR in the civil justice system.
In practice, this means that if you are considering legal action, it is more important than ever to consider whether a suitable ADR option—such as ED—can deliver a better, faster outcome.
What does an Expert Determination process look like?
While each ED is tailored to the dispute, a typical process includes:
- Agreement to use ED
Both parties agree to appoint an independent expert and confirm whether the determination will be binding. - Defining the questions to be determined
The parties set out the specific issues the expert is asked to decide (for example: causation, compliance, appropriate remedial scope, or cost apportionment). - Document review and evidence
The expert receives core documents (contract/specification, survey notes, photos, communications, invoices, manufacturer information, and any prior reports). - Site inspection (where required)
For most fenestration disputes, an on-site inspection is often the most efficient way to establish facts. - Determination issued
The expert provides a reasoned conclusion and, where appropriate, a practical remedy pathway.
When ED may not be the right tool
ED is highly effective for technical disputes. However, it may be less suitable where the dispute is dominated by:
- allegations of fraud or serious dishonesty,
- complex multi-party legal issues,
- urgent injunctive relief,
- disputes requiring extensive witness evidence and cross-examination.
In those cases, other routes (mediation, adjudication, arbitration, or litigation) may be more appropriate. A good ADR provider will be candid about suitability at the outset.
RISA and Expert Determination for glazing disputes
RISA’s work is grounded in technical inspection and evidence-led conclusions. For disputes involving window and door installations, ED provides a structured alternative to legal action that is:
- proportionate to the value and complexity of most residential and light commercial disputes,
- focused on technical causation and remedy, and
- designed to reach a clear outcome without the cost and delay of court.
If you are a homeowner or an installation considering legal action Expert Determination may offer a more effective route to resolution.