RICS DRS – the first 50 years
22 February 2026Feb 2026 – The RICS DRS marking 50 years this year is to be congratulated. I have paid tribute direct including. of course, it helps to have a monopoly for appointments in probably every lease of commercial property in England and Wales. It wasn’t always thus. My experience of dispute resolution pre-dates the RICS DRS. I remember when procedure was a lot different. For examples, (i) for appointment, the Institute of Arbitrators, (ii) two persons to be appointed as arbitrator; (ii) the President of the Law Society; and (iv) the President of a Chamber of Commerce local to the premises.
Ever since invited and accepted appointment to act as Independent Expert to determine the rent review of a shop in Willesden, London NW10, I have breathed a sigh of relief at never again. From that experience, I concluded not an enviable task. It is all very well inviting representations from the parties, but not if they are so subjective as to be of no assistance at all.
When you know the buck stops with you, it is perhaps inevitable to be cautious. As suggested to me during a discussion about a disappointing outcome, the client impression of a third party nervous of six figure rents. (Please read my article “Third Party Inexperience”.)
I thoroughly enjoy acting either as expert witness or advocate, or in a dual-role clear at all times in which capacity. Nowadays I’ve a reputation among third parties for being thorough. Or, as my wife remarks, whenever I emerge from days of intense writing, doing the other person’s job for them. For example, a landlord’s surveyor’s offering is 7 megabytes, whereas mine for the tenant is 101 megabytes.
My decision at the start of this year to tell RICS DRS Independent experts that their directions must not be akin to those of arbitrators is underway. No reliance on SOAF. Unless premises are awkward configuration, it shouldn’t cost the parties more than about 30 minutes of the IE’s time to measure areas. i make up for assertive in procedure, a separate issue to the quality of assistance: hence my preference for thorough.
On 6 September 2013 in Lexology, Nicholas Cheffings and Dellah Gilbert, of Hogan Lovells solicitors, in their article about the RICS consultation on Independent Expert rent reviews, refer to “The document recognises that, contrary to what may be seen as the leading strengths of independent expert determination (namely, a quick, simple and cost-effective means of dispute resolution) it has become stablished practice to invite the parties to provide material to the independent expert in much the same way as if the matter were proceeding by way of arbitration. This seems to reflect the parties understandable desire to “have their say” rather than simply relying upon the independent expert as being truly “independent” as well as “expert”. Perhaps the parties should give more consideration to going back to basics, dispensing with expert evidence and simply asking the independent third-party for an answer to what is, more often than not, a straightforward valuation question.”
Return to Article