Bulb rental?

sooz

GDB2222 wrote: »

Very helpful, Chris. It's a shame that you're in Yorkshire, and I need EPCs in London. You're not passing through soon, are you?

I booked mine in London through the NLA. Contrary to what the various emails I receive from the various EPC providers every day, they are not busy, & could see me the same afternoon.

silvercar

If any landlords just read that and thought "Right, I'll put the word out that I'll be collecting dead LELs on a recycling effort I can raise my green image and pull an extra 2 points on the EPCs at the same time" my advice is don't bother, its not worth it!

When any LELs die in my house I will be saving them up to put in the rented property and when I see my elevtrician next week I will tell him I'll take any dead LELs off his hands. I'm not going to go ona freecycle drive, but one conversation and I could be sorted.

By the way, all of you reading this that have low VOLTAGE lights in kitchens, bathrooms etc these are not low energy and each one counts as half an incandescent. On the plus side though if you have fluorescent strip lights in for example your kitchen or heated garage each one of those counts as a low energy bulb as do LED based lights.

I've got 20 of the damn things in my kitchen, so thats 10 negative points against my one fluorescent in the garage.

chriserenity

silvercar wrote: »

When any LELs die in my house I will be saving them up to put in the rented property and when I see my elevtrician next week I will tell him I'll take any dead LELs off his hands. I'm not going to go ona freecycle drive, but one conversation and I could be sorted.

Seriously I hope you're having us on _pale_. Do yourself a favour, get your EPC done earlier than you need, have a look at the recommendations and call the number on the thing to see what free money you can get to install the measures.

Gordon Brown was just on the news announcing he'll be pushing the energy companies even further to provide EPC recommendations for free or at greatly reduced cost. Thats information the Energy Saving Trust has - call them!

Last poll we conducted on a sample of 200 people on our local high street on this subject was over 50% factor energy efficiency into their decision on which property to buy and of those that rented said energy efficiency was one of their top three considerations when looking at a property :think:.

I.e. Its NOT money saving to the tenant to mess about with dead LELs, it IS moneysaving to act on the recommendations in the EPC and it IS moneysaving to then have an efficient property which will pay dividends for you when/if you decide to sell it (see the stats above!)

I mean if you're going to go to the hassle of swapping the lightbulbs round before the assessor gets there for the sake of 2 points out of 100 difference to save shelling out maybe £15 which is then inaccurate when the tenant moves in why not take the same time to get the FREE money to top up the insulation to 270mm, get the free cavity wall insulation, get the free boiler if yours is defunct/you don't have one from Warmfront etc etc.

tbs624

chriserenity wrote: »

Seriously I hope you're having us on _pale_. Do yourself a favour, get your EPC done earlier than you need,..............

Do you really mean "do the local DEAs a favour because their income projections haven't yet hit the dizzy heights they were promised when they shelled out for their "training?" And very few LLs (or indeed OOs) are going to fiddle about further upgrading, to then pay out a further fee to another DEA.

chriserenity wrote: »

... have a look at the recommendations and call the number on the thing to see what free money you can get to install the measures.

You're making a huge assumption there that every rental property is lacking in double glazing, appropriate insulation etc.

The fact remains that one of the biggest effects on a property's emissions levels is the occupant's lifestyle.

chriserenity wrote: »

Last poll we conducted on a sample of 200 people on our local high street on this subject was over 50% factor energy efficiency into their decision on which property to buy and of those that rented said energy efficiency was one of their top three considerations when looking at a property :think:.

That's not really a scientific study is it? Who is "we"? Can you give us an example of your wording?

Ask any LL what the most frequent questions are from potential tenants and they'll tell you that separately it does not rate that highly on the list of concerns when compared to closeness to work, schools, size of rooms (can I fit my furniture in), do I like the neighbourhood, is it noisy here etc: it will be a balance of pros and cons.

On a personal level, I may choose to let property that would come up with a reasonably good EPC rating - but for my own home, I love older properties with a few draughts and would never choose to live in a hermetically sealed Barratt -type box no matter how pukka its rating was.

chriserenity wrote: »

I.e. Its NOT money saving to the tenant to mess about with dead LELs, it IS moneysaving to act on the recommendations in the EPC and it IS moneysaving to then have an efficient property which will pay dividends for you when/if you decide to sell it (see the stats above!)

:rolleyes: Oh come on, Chris, those are not "stats" that prove that any such dividends will result.

chriserenity wrote: »

I mean if you're going to go to the hassle of swapping the lightbulbs round before the assessor gets there for the sake of 2 points out of 100 difference to save shelling out maybe £15 which is then inaccurate when the tenant moves in why not take the same time to get the FREE money to top up the insulation to 270mm, get the free cavity wall insulation, get the free boiler if yours is defunct/you don't have one from Warmfront etc etc.

Erm, because many of us already have those things in place? I think you miss one of the key points - when people are irritated by inadequate measures that don't address the real issues ( & there is a likely element of "function creep" thrown in for good measure) then it is human nature to play daft games that show up some of the flaws in that system.

It's just the start - I reckon that eventually everyone will be made to follow those upgrade "recommendations", there will be fines (possibly even a public flogging) for LLs who don't supply their Tenants with free LEL, there will be so much insulation around the letterbox that no LL will ever be able to serve a S21 again.........:eek:

chriserenity

tbs624 wrote: »

Do you really mean "do the local DEAs a favour because their income projections haven't yet hit the dizzy heights they were promised when they shelled out for their "training?" And very few LLs (or indeed OOs) are going to fiddle about further upgrading, to then pay out a further fee to another DEA.

No, I mean pay the same DEA that did the initail inspection to come out again to update the report for a small surcharge (agree this when ordering it). I have had landlords ask me to do this - you probably won't get this with the big companies as they're so inflexible so I'd advise finding someone independent that you can establish a good working relationship with.

tbs624 wrote: »

You're making a huge assumption there that every rental property is lacking in double glazing, appropriate insulation etc.

Anecdotally I was at a property last week, very nicely decorated and already tenanted by a lady very happy with her current residence until upon being asked what my being there was all about I told her there was no insulation in the walls, nothing in the loft and with a boiler in the loft older than God. I asked if she had access to a report on the place telling her the above and more for free before she signed the agreement would she have still signed up for 6 months. Answer was yes she would have read it and no she would have opted for something more up to standard but as it was the landlord told her it was all recently done up and she assumed this meant insulated too.

Truth is alot of landlords are unhappy with the EPC because for many the perception is that it benefits the tenant and not the landlord particularly if not alot can be done about raising the scores to something half decent but it can benefit both parties. Its a european directive and here to stay, best make the most of it!

Re your comment that

tbs624 wrote: »

"The fact remains that one of the biggest effects on a property's emissions levels is the occupant's lifestyle."

is irrelevant in terms of the EPC. Like I said, STANDARD OCCUPANCY means the tenant can compare one property with any other when considering which to rent in conjunction with other factors like location, rent etc. The EPC isn't there with any one individual in mind, its there for comparison!

tbs624 wrote: »

That's not really a scientific study is it? Who is "we"? Can you give us an example of your wording?

What do you want, a double blind study with error ratios and all? We is our partnership. If you want 'scientific' research go to the government/Energy Saving Trust for specific figures - its there if you look.

tbs624 wrote: »

Ask any LL what the most frequent questions are from potential tenants and they'll tell you that separately it does not rate that highly on the list of concerns when compared to closeness to work, schools, size of rooms (can I fit my furniture in), do I like the neighbourhood, is it noisy here etc: it will be a balance of pros and cons.

The EPC prepares for the future. Do you deny the coming ramifications of Peak Oil/Gas and Global Warming? Concern for the EPC will be proportion to individual conscience for the educated and budget size for the poor or a combination of both.

tbs624 wrote: »

On a personal level I may choose to let property that would come up with a reasonably good EPC rating - on a personal level, for my own home, I love older properties with a few draughts and would never choose to live in a hermetically sealed Barratt -type box no matter how pukka its rating was.

Well, if you're not short of a few bob/not concerned about the above issues this kind of thing might not interest you but then its not those of us with money that this will most benefit, it will most benefit the poorer sections of society/those with environmental consciences.

silvercar

It won't benefit the poorer in society, quite the opposite. If the higher EPC rated properties can command a higher rent, the lower rated properties will be let to those seeking a lower rent.

I can't actually do an EPC because there is a tenant there, who doesn't need to be bothered by an EPC guy surveying her home. TBH I haven't a clue how energy efficient it is, first tenant grabbed the place (due to cheap rent for area and nearby school) before I had a chance to go into the loft. No idea if there is loft insulation or cavity walls. As its a mid-terrace a lot of the "insulation" will come from the neighbours!

To be slightly more serious on the light bulb front. Tenants are generally responsible for replacing light bulbs. When an LEL goes, chances are they will put in the cheapest possible.

chriserenity

silvercar wrote: »

It won't benefit the poorer in society, quite the opposite. If the higher EPC rated properties can command a higher rent, the lower rated properties will be let to those seeking a lower rent.

I can't actually do an EPC because there is a tenant there, who doesn't need to be bothered by an EPC guy surveying her home. TBH I haven't a clue how energy efficient it is, first tenant grabbed the place (due to cheap rent for area and nearby school) before I had a chance to go into the loft. No idea if there is loft insulation or cavity walls. As its a mid-terrace a lot of the "insulation" will come from the neighbours!

To be slightly more serious on the light bulb front. Tenants are generally responsible for replacing light bulbs. When an LEL goes, chances are they will put in the cheapest possible.

Copied text from the EPC:

"Replacement of traditional light bulbs with energy saving recommended ones will reduce lighting costs over the lifetime o the bulb, and they last up to 12 times longer than ordinary light bulbs. Also consider selecting low energy light fittings when redecorating/ contact the Lighting Association for your nearest stockist of Domestic Energy Efficient Lighting Scheme Fittings".

Regardless of whether the EPC creates a tiered value system with a sub-class of horribly rated properties going to the destitute or rich is irrelevant. The information is there to judge which is the main thing. Transparency is never a bad thing.

Sure, most of the rental EPCs i've done have been between tenancies while the property is vacant for the reasons you gave, understandable. I quite often bump into the CORGI guy or the landlord with polyfiller gun in hand plugging the fist shaped holes in the wall :rotfl:

You're quite right, a mid terraced property will if everything is equal perform better efficiency wise than a detached or semi-detached property with flats being the best performers but remember the loft and external walls are heat losers so insulation will benefit the property. You can't really rationalise not insulating a property because it adjoins more than one other property IMO!

Anyway, have to go do a HIP now. Hope this has been useful, post EPC/HIP related questions here and I'll do my best to get to them when I'm a bit less busy.

Chris.

tbs624

chriserenity wrote: »

No, I mean pay the same DEA that did the initail inspection to come out again to update the report for a small surcharge (agree this when ordering it). I have had landlords ask me to do this - you probably won't get this with the big companies as they're so inflexible so I'd advise finding someone independent that you can establish a good working relationship with.

I think you are missing my response point about in whose favour it is to get a EPC done “sooner rather than later” as you suggested - doesn’t matter whether you are paying a full fee or a surcharge, the DEA is still the one in whose favour that deal is. They clearly have to repay their 3 or 4 K “training” fees.

chriserenity wrote: »

Anecdotally I was at a property last week, very nicely decorated and already tenanted by a lady very happy with her current residence until upon being asked what my being there was all about I told her there was no insulation in the walls, nothing in the loft and with a boiler in the loft older than God. I asked if she had access to a report on the place telling her the above and more for free before she signed the agreement would she have still signed up for 6 months. Answer was yes she would have read it and no she would have opted for something more up to standard but as it was the landlord told her it was all recently done up and she assumed this meant insulated too.

If you are entering a contact - any contract - then never, ever assume anything, if it is something that would be key to your decision-making. All the tenant needed to do was ask specifically about the level of insulation. How about if there was no similar property available at the time, in the right area, for the right duration of tenancy, at the right price etc that was ”more up to standard”?

chriserenity wrote: »

Truth is alot of landlords are unhappy with the EPC because for many the perception is that it benefits the tenant and not the landlord particularly if not alot can be done about raising the scores to something half decent but it can benefit both parties. Its a european directive and here to stay, best make the most of it!

No -a lot of people, also including LLs, are unhappy with it because they recognise for it what it is: something which makes it look as if something is being done, when it is not. Yes, its an EU directive - lots of things can be either Govt directives or EU directives but it doesn’t mean that those things necessarily make sense in the wider scheme of things, nor that people should simply shrug and not raise any objections.

You said earlier that some of the points I raised in my other post were to be addressed by changes to the software - now if everybody had sat on their hands and said nothing that wouldn’t be happening, would it?

chriserenity wrote: »

Re your comment that is irrelevant in terms of the EPC. Like I said, STANDARD OCCUPANCY means the tenant can compare one property with any other when considering which to rent in conjunction with other factors like location, rent etc. The EPC isn't there with any one individual in mind, its there for comparison!

Don’t shout Chris - I understand the term standard occupancy: however, the figures on possible costs have been shown to bear little resemblance to reality and are capable of being misleading to many people.

chriserenity wrote: »

What do you want, a double blind study with error ratios and all? We is our partnership. If you want 'scientific' research go to the government/Energy Saving Trust for specific figures - its there if you look.

If someone is quoting a “survey” as an indicator of the popularity/relevance or otherwise of anything then yep, I do expect the methodology to hold up, especially when they have a vested interest in proving their point You didn’t give us any example wordings of your actual survey questions…….?

chriserenity wrote: »

The EPC prepares for the future.

Nope, the EPC is a piece of paper produced by DEAs unnecessarily driving round all over the country and printing off reams of paper in a non-environmentally-friendly way. Proper action is what will prepare for the future - the EPC is just a piece of fancy dress.

chriserenity wrote: »

Do you deny the coming ramifications of Peak Oil/Gas and Global Warming? Concern for the EPC will be proportion to individual conscience for the educated and budget size for the poor or a combination of both.

Well, if you're not short of a few bob/not concerned about the above issues this kind of thing might not interest you but then its not those of us with money that this will most benefit, it will most benefit the poorer sections of society/those with environmental consciences.

:rolleyes:It will not benefit the poorer sections of society - the more the Govt, and people whose financial livelihood depends on the success of the scheme, plug away at it, the more some people will begin to convince themselves that they can charge proportionately higher rents for those properties with the right colour highlighted on their barchart. So, then, anyone on a low income is, as usual, left downstream, down-wind, and sitting in the properties with the lowest ratings because those are all that they can afford the rent for.

Your use of phrases like “individual conscience for the educated” made me roar with laughter: anyone who is educated is more likely to see the flaws in the system Are you saying that, in your mind, (as a DEA assessor-so no bias there) those who go along with EPCs are the only “people of conscience”?

The fact that anyone may not agree with EPCs doesn’t mean that they are not making their own far more worthwhile adjustments towards resolving the problems.

Let’s have a look at that one shall we - how about if I got an A or B on my EPC, but I also do any or all of the following: drive a honking great 4 wheel drive (esp. for school journeys & other short journeys, fly several thousand miles a year, like my heating turned up high because I can’t bear wearing extra clothes indoors, sit under a patio heater in my garden, buy expensive food that has been flown halfway across the world, take long power showers, have a ride-on petrol mower, use a dishwasher & tumble dryer as often as I possibly can, love to buy stuff in packaging & leave lots of things on standby, like to leave my office lights on all night to highlight my commercial presence in the world & deter burglars and so on…but hey, I got a good EPC rating on my properties, I care for the world & our future…..


Edit - clearly in agreement with Silvercar, whose post wasn't there when I first hit reply distractions, distractions.....

tbs624

chriserenity wrote: »

......Regardless of whether the EPC creates a tiered value system with a sub-class of horribly rated properties going to the destitute or rich is irrelevant. The information is there to judge which is the main thing.....

I disagree - it's *highly relevant* if one of the key pro-EPC arguments is that the system will benefit the poorer members of society.

chriserenity wrote: »

Transparency is never a bad thing.

Agree but there's precious little of it on the topic of EPCs - you've just scored a bit of an own goal, I think:D