Official Free Boilers and Insulation guide discussion

leannedoc

I've just been told that the so called 'free' boilers are not really free and payments are secretly added to your energy bills. Anyone know if this is true?

captainhindsight_2

leannedoc wrote: »

I've just been told that the so called 'free' boilers are not really free and payments are secretly added to your energy bills. Anyone know if this is true?

No it's not true.

All parts of ECO are grants, which do not have to be repaid. This includes 'free' boilers if the circumstances are correct.

What you are talking about is 'no upfront cost boilers' which is essentially just boiler on a finance plan.

If people are selling the latter as 'free' they are clearly miss selling and should be reported to relevant people and have nothing to do with the genuine grants available.

adonis

Ladylaura27 wrote: »

Hi im not sure where we stand legally or who to ask we had a free boiler installed in November 2013 however the owner of the property has now decided he wants to sell the house. will we be entitled to claim another one at our new home when we have only had ours for 10 months.

captainhindsight wrote: »

Yes you would, in theory you can move house every week and claim a new boiler in every house providing the occupant and the property meet the criteria. There are landlords, who have paid tenants to do this.

Does anyone else find this appalling, private landlords getting boilers for free when you see posts on here where people have no hot water or heating and no money yet they get told they are not entitled to one.:(

al2000

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone can help me.

I tried to get cavity wall insulation through the BG offer on here, and everything was ok until they checked to energy certificate for the house. It stated that the cavity wall is "Partially insulated (assumed)". Now, I've drilled the wall in several locations over the years, and I've never seen a hint of insulation in the wall. The energy certificate is about 6 years old (when I bought the house) and the assessor (and the company he worked for) have long since disappeared. I spoke to a local insulation company that said that due to the age of the house (1980 build), the "system" makes an assuption that partial cavity wall insulation is fitted even though actual evidence suggests there is none!!

Can anyone give advice on what to do here? Do I need to resign to the fact that if I want cavity wall insulation, I need to buy it outright myself?

Thank you in advance.
Al.

Smiley_Dan

What do you expect to see when you drill the wall? Often, due to builders being cheapskates, they'll fit cavity batts which are just like lift roll fitted vertically. You won't see this if you just drill a hole. You can sometimes see it in larger gaps e.g. behind the electricity meter if it's mounted in the external wall. Otherwise you would have to use a borescope.

But EPCs are often written under assumptions. Not sure what you can do to get this changed... Maybe they do a borescope survey for GDARs.

aggypanthus

Anastas wrote: »

Sorry aggypanthus.

Not sure why my post annoyed you. Just trying to help this lady. I know SSAFA help the families of armed services in all sorts of ways. If such an innocent suggestion results in a response like this i won't bother posting again.

sorry, I didnt mean to be nasty to you, please dont be put off:beer:

aggypanthus

adonis wrote: »

Does anyone else find this appalling, private landlords getting boilers for free when you see posts on here where people have no hot water or heating and no money yet they get told they are not entitled to one.:(

Some of us genuinely want to help the tenants to be warmer, save on bills etc. Landlords arent all rich with a pot of cash. Anyway , any tenant can apply themselves for whatever they choose.
I dont agree with the greedy LL who scam the system.

Its also unfair that a single person on benefits for himself only, doesnt qualify for the boiler scheme.But, if the person get t credits or ctc, they qualify.

captainhindsight_2

adonis wrote: »

Does anyone else find this appalling, private landlords getting boilers for free when you see posts on here where people have no hot water or heating and no money yet they get told they are not entitled to one.:(

The only way to avoid this would be to exclude tenants from eligibility or make the tenant stay a minimum term after having the boiler which is not fair on the tenant or the landlord.

The problem a lot of people are having is like with all of these grants etc. there is a limited amount of money available, and the reality is landlords are switched on and can see a good deal where as individuals often 'think about it' until it is too late.

So the key is when these things come available act quick! people often say 'if its too good to be true, it is' but this does not apply in all situations there is a real push by this government to get rid of fuel poverty by making homes more energy efficient but they can only spend so much money at a time.

Smiley_Dan

captainhindsight wrote: »

So the key is when these things come available act quick! people often say 'if its too good to be true, it is' but this does not apply in all situations there is a real push by this government to get rid of fuel poverty by making homes more energy efficient but they can only spend so much money at a time.

No there isn't. These schemes are-what-they-are, and great if you happen to be well informed. But don't think lip service and a few tenners they have found down the back of the sofa makes up a commitment to domestic energy efficiency.

al2000

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your reply. Perhaps I should have made it clear that the holes were big enough for me to see the cavity itself, and all I could see was brick. Obviously, I could have just drilled in a place where there just happened to be no insulation!

I think what's really annoying me is the fact that it is assumed. The energy rating of the house depends on there being (partial) insulation installed, and the evidence is pointing to there being none (or very little, at least). Surely it would have been better to assume the worst unless there was evidence to suggest otherwise?

Anyhow, thanks for the advice. I'm not sure how I'm going to get it changed. I may have to bite the bullet and pay for it myself.