PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Energy Performance Certificates

1235»

Comments

  • ps2010
    ps2010 Posts: 7 Forumite
    sonastin wrote: »
    I think if you've already come across it once or twice in 4 years, it isn't as rare as you're suggesting.

    I think that there are more "non-standard" houses for sale than "standard" - anything built before the Building Act 1984 brought building regs to the masses and anything that has had any sort of work done on it will more than likely have features not picked up by the software.

    The more assumptions that are made, the less accurate the conclusion. There is no point in comparing one inaccurate result with another inaccurate (in a different way) result. So you can't use EPCs to compare anything in a meaningful way. Which leads me to conclude that they are meaningless.

    The changes to the software are too little too late because there are thousands of meaningless EPCs already out there, valid for several years to come...

    Sonastin,
    Are you seriously suggesting that all the totally identical Victorian and Edwardian housing stock in London is non-standard because it was built prior to 1984?
    What features are you referring to exactly?
    And yes, if I have seen one building with hot water pipes running outside the building, I would say that is very uncommon as a total percentage of the buildings I had inspected.

    Yes, alot of what is in an EPC is common sense, but that makes it even more ridiculous when you come across houses that don't even have loft insulation, does it not. (Of which I think 60-70% don't). And strangely, as I remember, it was always the biggest, most expensive houses that had no loft insulation and a geriatric boiler.

    As I have tried to explain before, we are going to have energy problems within the next 5 years. Well over 50% of our housing stock is built with no insulation, so how do we deal with them?
    If we ignore them the country remains grossly energy inefficient and weaker for it (in terms of land use, resources and trade agreements with countries from which we must import the energy (Russia being the main one)).
    Is this really what people want?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.8K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.1K Life & Family
  • 257.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.