HIPS on rented property coming in October

tbs624

david29dpo wrote: »

I dont think tenants have anything to worry about. No LL in there right mind will add it to the rent, whats £50 over a year anyway? The EPC will give tenants a choose.

Do you undertake HIPs David? Just wondered - apologies if I have confused you with another poster

Just thought it may be worth highlighting this bit:

"A Certificate for a building gives the building an asset rating based on its energy efficiency, but doesn't take into account how the home is used by the occupiers."

from http://www.homeinformationpacks.gov.uk

Many DEAs are currently advertising lower prices in an attempt to get the work in prior to the Oct 2008 deadline for new tenancies. They also tend to have a 2-tier system of pricing so those with larger rental property portfolios will pay less per ECP than a LL with one or two properties.

The costs *will* be added into rents - but the £50 that you quote for example is for an EPC lasting 10 years.

It won't help tenants a great deal because the EPC will become out of date: when any LL does any work that may improve the rating s/he is not going to pay out for another EPC so the concept of the EPCs as a relevant piece of info will quickly become devalued (if indeed it's ever viewed that way). AFIAA there have also been quality & accreditation issues over some of the work of the DEAs themselves.

The idea that EPCs will affect supply & demand is a fallacy IMO: properties that have a good rating will not be commanding a bigger rent/having more potential tenants than the property down the road with the arrow pointing two bars below - rents are not based simply on one factor.

If a tenant needs a property of a specific size in a particular area then s/he will generally base the decision on what is actually available within that slot, rather than saying "ooh , I had my heart set on a B-rated property - I can't possibly take anything less. I'll carry on waiting in my tent, or my B&B, until a B rated property does become available"

Tenants have a choice now - they just need to ask the right questions before they sign up and tell the LL/LA that they expect to have freedom to switch their energy suppliers as and when necessary.

Frugaldom

Some interesting posts here, some quite funny ones, too. I've been in the unfortunate position of HAVING to rent privately for the past 7 years now. I've relocated 3 times, had 7 different addresses, am looking for my 8th and would love to be back in the situation that I could buy. However, whilst renting, which is what this thread is about, I cannot see the relevance or even any remote difference that a certificate will make. I reckong it's more about all property owners having all their houses certified and it's probably more to do with government statistics than anything else. As an example, Government departments must be the largest landlords in the country, so I'm assuming that all councils, housing associations, military bases, prison services etc, etc, etc are going to have to do the exact same, and guess who foots the bill for that?! I think it's just part of an energy watch with or without a possible hidden agenda.

lynzpower

If I was renting now, I certainly would be looking at the EPCs, its THAT which will be able to dictate how much money I'll have to spend/ save. If I was buying, Ill be honest it owuld be less of an issue,. after all I would get insulation/cavity wall/ double glazing solar panels etc etc myself, so I can have the most efficient - and moneysaving system.

I supose its a good idea for the majority of us that live in cities, there are choices, "that one will be more efficient than that, and its only round the corner" in more rural areas Id imagine that there are less choices and whatever landlord will take you in a small village will have to do

tbs624

nykmedia wrote: »

...... I've relocated 3 times, had 7 different addresses, am looking for my 8th and would love to be back in the situation that I could buy. However, whilst renting, which is what this thread is about, I cannot see the relevance or even any remote difference that a certificate will make. I reckong it's more about all property owners having all their houses certified and it's probably more to do with government statistics than anything else. As an example, Government departments must be the largest landlords in the country, so I'm assuming that all councils, housing associations, military bases, prison services etc, etc, etc are going to have to do the exact same, and guess who foots the bill for that?! I think it's just part of an energy watch with or without a possible hidden agenda.

That's a lot of moves

Buildings apparently account for up to 50% of UK carbon emissions but I have yet to see a breakdown on residential properties v commercial properties. Yep- let's have a close look at all those grace and favour properties for members of the Govt. What did Mr Blair's farewell tour clock up in terms of carbon emissions? How many flights do they all make that aren't necessary - video-conferencing as an alternative? What about old 2 jags and his ilk in their big fat gas guzzling ministerial cars?

I think that EPCs are about being seen to do something (ie we have "trained" some people and we have sold everyone a shiny coloured bar chart") rather than *actually* doing something that demonstrably cuts emissions.

It's interesting to see Lynz's viewpoint but most tenants will still ask whether there is somewhere to park, if there is a broadband connection, satellite/cable telly or how good the signal is for their mobile phone before they even think about asking questions on thermal efficiency and carbon emissions ( if they do, at all).

When you have "experts" who can't even agree on whether cavity wall insulation is a good thing or the cause of problems in properties I'm not sure that people will be rushing out to upgrade a property whether rented or owner occupied, even though some councils do have limited pots of money to offer grants for insulation on rental properties, with priority going to HMOs.

The way individuals live obviously plays a huge part in the actual costs of their bills too. Many LL are simply not going to make "recommended improvements", when the way these EPCs are put together results in this type of scenario:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=A1YourView&xml=/property/2008/05/22/pgreen122.xml

I also think that as with the tenancy deposit regs, many LLs will simply not comply until they are caught up with.

lynzpower

I also think that as with the tenancy deposit regs, many LLs will simply not comply until they are caught up with.

good view TBS and Im becoming more convinced that I'm being London centric again with the variety & choice in housing that is not available elsewshere.

On this point tho, wouldnt it be the same as the HIPS purchasing system, where the EPC needs to be displayed "at point of marketing" Would love to know how this will be managed for the private "in the paper shop window" marketing tho. Wonder how loot & gumtree will cope :confused

PayDay

tbs624 wrote: »

I also think that as with the tenancy deposit regs, many LLs will simply not comply until they are caught up with.

With the deposit scheme, you have to give a deposit to a LL before you find out they are not conforming to the law and then it is the tenant who has to take to LL to the court to get the LL to comply with the law (that law needs changing). With an EPC, anyone viewing a rental property will be able to see the EPC before any money exchanges hands.

If the government decides to check up on areas to see who is breaking the law, they can get a lot of viewings per person, done in one day.

Getting an EPC works out to to less than 50pence per month over the 10 years. The saving to a tenant on energy bills, will be much more than that. The cost to the LL could be greater if :-

• they have to modernise their properties to get a better rating, in order to get a tenant or get the rent they want.
• they have been avoiding their taxes, as now the government will have access to a list of who the LLs are.

tbs624

PayDay wrote: »

.......Getting an EPC works out to to less than 50pence per month over the 10 years. The saving to a tenant on energy bills, will be much more than that. The cost to the LL could be greater if :-

• they have to modernise their properties to get a better rating, in order to get a tenant or get the rent they want.
• they have been avoiding their taxes, as now the government will have access to a list of who the LLs are.

In many areas LLs will be paying far more than 50/60 quid.

A LL getting an EPC for a property per se does *not* equate to a reduction in energy bills: if a property that I let currently has double glazing, a boiler that is less than 5 years old, insulation to the recommended level wherever appropriate etc, then how does me getting an EPC for that property make a scrap of difference? The answer is that it doesn't.

If I have an attractive older property, that maybe still (shock horror) has single glazing and an older heating system backed up with stunning open fireplaces and I get an EPC for that, it will not alter a tenant's heating bills if they stay there. And the tenant who likes that type of property will still take up those tenancies, rather than seeking out a hermetically sealed box with a B or C rating and potentially lower bills.Let's remember that it does not take into account how individual tenants use their utility supplies - for example any tenant who has bills included in their rent is likely to leave gas/elec running day and night. An Epc won't affect the bills there andit certianly won't affect any emissions from that building.

For people's heating bills to be reduced there would have to be a requirement that *all* properties not currently reaching a specific rating had to be brought up to a minimum and that simply won't happen, not least because the methodology used to produce these things is flawed IMO.

Even if EPCs were subsidised by an EU grant & free at the point of delivery or they also gave all property owners a bottle of wine for each one they had done I still think that they are yet another example of "looking busy, doing nothing," if you know what I mean.

(I am however all for LLs having to account to HMRC and comply with their other legal obligations on repairs, deposits, safety etc)

RHemmings

sooz wrote: »

Yes, but the rent will probably go up to match

Only if the rent has not already been set at the most they're likely to get (leaving room for negotiation).

Frugaldom

tbs624 wrote: »

...(I am however all for LLs having to account to HMRC and comply with their other legal obligations on repairs, deposits, safety etc)

What happens to those tenants with landlords who are not complying with current, let alone any new, legislation? Should tenants leave and risk homelessness? England and Scotland have completely different laws, so how can they make something mandatory throughout the UK, or the EU, for that matter? Is Brussels going to fine Britain if they can't account for certificates on x million homes? I find this quite hilarious. They can't even police landlords up here using mandatory 'landlord registration', so what chance have they of finding out how eco-friendly each and every house is, especially as it depends ENTIRELY on occupants' lifestyles. It's pretty obvious that the further north you live, the more power will be needed to stay warm & dry. Like TBS624 says, there will probably be plenty who won't comply until 'caught' and let's face it, the Government can't afford 'property police' and the police have better things to do than knock doors asking to see home certificates. It takes them all their time to knock doors asking about shotgun licenses. Oh! I get it, we should club together and set up a group similar to TV licensing and have vans checking and tracking the microchipped certificates! :rotfl:

Another question - will this certificate only be required at the point of offering a house for rent or sale, meaning that tenanted properties will be overlooked until vacated? The more I think about it, the more it's looking good for tenants with 'law evading' landlords - they can't be asked to move out because the dodgy landlord would never find anyone to replace them and would then need to work out how to sell the property when they don't actually live in it! (Yeah, right!) :rotfl:

Do we even have HIPS in Scotland yet? NO! We could be getting 'The House Report' by the end of this year, as suggested by, wait for it, the "Housing Improvement Task Force (HITF)" :rotfl:

Oh, isn't it nice to have something to amuse us with the knowledge that our taxes are paying for it all - who needs the BBC?

ChunkyAlan

EPC - yes another cost to the LL. When will it end? Just wait for mandatory electrical testing!!!!!

A LL and LA CANNOT advertise a property for rent from the 1st October 2008 unless an EPC is on file to provide the prospective applicant/tenant.

They cost between £50-85 and are valid for 10 years if the property is constantly let or 1 year should you wish to sell it after 12 months.

A large Countrywide agent is offering a special offer to LL's through their surveying dept - £55 if you have it done before the 1st October - it then goes up to £85.

If you sell it within the 12 months then the EPC can be added to your HIPS.

The government talk about tenants choosing a house on its EPC - I dont think so! Its all for the government and the meeting its requirement for the European government and Kyoto agreement.

Its means very little, it costs the LL and makes no difference to the letability of the property - just one more piece of paperwork for the LL and LA to have to deal with.