Energy Performance Certificate

alanmilstein

Richard_Webster wrote: »

Why is it so important to see the EPC?

Because the EPC is very generalised and all the predicted savings etc by doing further works are based upon standard usage by a typical occupation of the property there is nothing much in the EPC which is of any real use.

I am waiting for someone to start a thread about suing an energy inspector because they put in loft insulation and did not save £XX on annual heating costs!

If, for instance, the boiler is rated as "Good" that does not mean it works! Energy Inspectors are not competent to check that kind of thing. It simply means it is of a type which has good thermal efficiency.

Please bear in mind that energy inspectors do NOT have the facility to adjust the estimated running costs quoted on the EPC. These are generated by the software which was comissioned by the Government.
Equally it is not a csae of energy assessors being not competent at checking whether a boiler works but that is not part of the survey that the Government decree.
An energy assessor is only allowed (they work to strict rules administered by a number of aurthorised accreditation schemes) to gather data, not confirm the functioning of the equipment installed.
I think it completely unlikely that any assessor could or would be sued in the way you describe. How can they be if they are not responsible for this part of the report?

sonastin

I think Richard's point is about someone feeling hard-done-by because they relied on the data in the EPC and trying to sue the energy assessor because of it.

I know it is not the energy assessor's fault that the EPC is actually a worthless piece of carp that provides minimal, if any, useful information. But that's because I am educated and understand these things. Joe Public rarely is and frequently defaults to "I didn't get what I want. Who can I sue?" in this day and age.

evoke

It was my EA's photographer who did the EPC. Apparently, this is quite common. And it's also a method that EAs use to pay the photographer for the photography work. The EA will charge you soemthing like £99+VAT for the EPC and claim that the professional photography is 'free'. The reality is that the EA can use the EPC fee to pay for the photography work.

The photographer does the photographs, floor plan and EPC.

G_M

alanmilstein wrote: »

Please bear in mind that energy inspectors do NOT have the facility to adjust the estimated running costs quoted on the EPC. These are generated by the software which was comissioned by the Government.
Equally it is not a csae of energy assessors being not competent at checking whether a boiler works but that is not part of the survey that the Government decree.
An energy assessor is only allowed (they work to strict rules administered by a number of aurthorised accreditation schemes) to gather data, not confirm the functioning of the equipment installed.
I think it completely unlikely that any assessor could or would be sued in the way you describe. How can they be if they are not responsible for this part of the report?

I think Richard's suggestion was pretty tongue-in-cheek! Reflecting the view most of us have not that the inspectors are really at fault, but that EPCs are a waste of time.
Evoke:

G_M: the EPC belongs to you. It does not belong to the EA. I know some EAs hang on to it and are extremely reluctant to give you the copy, but it is something that you own and are entitled to. Owners need to harrass and intimidate EAs a lot more to get the EPC and stop letting EAs walk all over them.

I'm well aware of this. That's why I said

Not all EA's/EPC providers give the owner a copy, though they should.

I was letting the OP aware that the common practice of witholding EPCs does not reflect the owner's right to it.