Home InformationPacks

david29dpo

I agree. My partner in our hips company passed the epc course back in august. The failure rate was very high, something like 70%. It was very intensive and I for one dont think i could have passed! As I have said before, the software is a little lax at the moment, this is not the epc inspectors fault. Its very easy to sit there and criticise, I did the same, until I went on a few surveys with him. It is true buyers at the moment arnt interested in the epc, this may change in the future the same as washing machines, I made sure my new one was A rated, something i have never done before.

chriserenity

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

But actually I'm not terribly interested in that information. I wouldn't care if it wasn't there. If it is presented to me I will look at it, but as I say the things I WOULD be interested in are not contained within the HIP.

I understand your point of view. I'm here to try and raise awareness about the EPC for people interested in their personal contribution to global warming and for people concerned about the size of their utility bills when they move into their next chosen home - fuel poverty and all that you know?

I can relate to that Dave, there were quite a few on my course too that didn't pass, one of them was a chartered surveyor I recall! I have spoken to my licencing scheme about ways the EPC software (rdSAP) could be improved and was told they have received similar feedback from other DEAs/HIs and will welcome other suggestions for when the software is improved. Its good to know they're listening to us, unlike the government!

BobProperty

chriserenity wrote: »

I can't speak for trading standards. If you have concerns about their efforts to multi task in monitoring effective training in the HIP industry while at the same time enforcing regulation in other industries I suggest you take it up with them.

I haven't got any complaints about them yet, but I suspect they are very busy anyway.

chriserenity wrote: »

DEAs come from a variety of backgrounds and regardless of what that may be all DEAs must sit exams and submit test EPCs for independent marking, their work is monitored and re-inspected and all have to undertake a required amount of CPD.

A Domestic Energy Assessor does not attempt to perform the duties of a chartered surveyor. DEAs perform domestic energy inspections and are qualified to do just that and no more. No one is suggesting the skill level of a DEA is equivalent to that of a chartered surveyor. By the way, chartered surveyors are NOT qualified to perform energy inspections without the same training received by DEAs. DEAs usually pay for their own PII/PLI insurance usually through their accreditation scheme as part of the fee they pay when submitting EPCs.

You post #33 refers to DEA/HIs. It's HI's I mainly have the complaint against but, hey, we don't need them now do we?

chriserenity wrote: »

The degree of quality control to become a DEA is quite rigorous so poorly trained inspectors will soon be caught out my the systems set up to regulate the industry. The bad apples I spoke of before will likely be removed in time.

You would say that wouldn't you? You're getting very defensive. Care to name an industry that wouldn't say that?

chriserenity wrote: »

You're complaining about DEAs being too cheap for your taste (on money saving expert?!?)? When you come to sell your house, tell it to the DEA doing the inspection and pay them the higher fee you feel comfortable with. Just make sure they're sitting down when you do?

Where did I complain DEAs were too cheap? I don't like the idea of having to pay someone to produce a document which I won't be interested in and neither will the potential buyers of any house I'm selling. How moneysaving is having to spend money because the government says so, on documentation no-one needs or is interested in?

chriserenity wrote: »

Unless we pull out of Europe our Government has no power to cease meeting the requirements set by the EEC unless it wants to face VERY heavy international level fines. I can't see that happening any time soon can you? Perhaps instead of asking if we are stuck with it you could ask how can it benefit us. Glass half full and all that hmm?

The government could easily change the way we enforce the EU rules. This government won't, another one might. It won't "benefit us" as it will cost "us" lots of money to be told information that we can find out for nothing.

chriserenity wrote: »

I recall they said the same thing about washing machines and light bulbs when they put the A-G ratings on them. How many of us look at a car's fuel consumption when deciding to buy one?

Er, no-one? Those rating really slashed the sales of S Class Mercs, 7 series Beemers and Bentleys didn't they? Oh OK, people do look up the mpg figures of cars before they buy them, but do car sellers have to pay someone to individually give them a figure for every car they are selling?

chriserenity wrote: »

The same A-G information (and more) is now available for homes in the EPC. Buyer disinterest in the EPC is IMO a product of a lack of information about the document.

No there aren't interested and you don't want to admit that otherwise you wouldn't have a job.

chriserenity wrote: »

The government and indeed the wider HIP industry as a whole has failed to step up to this education challenge. It is only a matter of time until EPC information becomes as important in buying homes as in the examples I just mentioned. Thats what I'm doing on here - trying to get the message across!

You just don't get it do you? The government had to put this into something because the EU has required the government it and came up with putting them in HIPs. Ever since HIPs were thought up more and more has been cut out of them until all that was left was the EPC. All that has happened since is spin, spin and more spin to try and convince the public that they are getting something for their money. There isn't an "educational challenge", it's government facing saving and most of the public can see through it or are sceptical.

chriserenity wrote: »

The assessor would look at the entire heating setup of the property including the boilers, radiators, any fixed room heaters and any portable appliances and use the criteria I mentioned in my earlier post (in varying degrees of importance) to identify a primary heating system, a secondary heating system, a method to control the primary system and a method of heating the domestic hot water. Information will be pulled from documentation on site, manufacturers databases and the SEDBUK database to correctly identify the components present and the information will be entered in part using a code system to represent the information in the software we use to produce the EPC. Does this answer your question?

No. How will you tell which boiler heats which part of the central heating? What do you do if the boiler isn't on the SEDBUK database? What difference would it make depending on the answer to my first two question? What difference will it make to the overall assessment? (Will anyone be bothered?)

chriserenity

BobProperty wrote: »

You post refers to DEA/HIs. It's HI's I mainly have the complaint against but, hey, we don't need them now do we?

We do need HIs to perform Home Condition Reports, currently a voluntary document in the Home Information Pack. People ARE ordering HCRs. For those reading this thread who aren't that familiar with the HCR, it is a report produced by a trained Home Inspector (you have to train for about a year to perform this type of report). The report is paid for by the seller and tells the buyer what physical condition the property is in, the logic being the seller pays for this report once so all potential buyers can look at it rather than for example three potential buyers paying for three separate Chartered Surveyors to produce a parallel report so that money is wasted as the report is duplicated and doubly so if you don't end up buying the place.

As you can see, there are vested interests craving to protect their core business who would love to see the HCR completely disappear to the detriment of consumers. Jobs for the boys as my its often called.

BobProperty wrote: »

I don't like the idea of having to pay someone to produce a document which I won't be interested in and neither will the potential buyers of any house I'm selling. How moneysaving is having to spend money because the government says so, on documentation no-one needs or is interested in?

The EU has made the right decision IMO. We NEED the EPC! Its moneysaving short and medium term as the EPC breaks down the improvements according to cost of installation so you can prioritise what to do when. Its moneysaving to the growing section of our society interested in the green credentials of whatever they buy. If you're not part that section I sincerely hope you change your mind!

In terms of the long term, you have to think about the larger picture i.e. the alternative the human race will face if nothing is done about global warming. The cost of doing nothing will be measured in body counts and the adaptions we will be forced to spend money on to cope with a warmer, wetter climate.

The EPC enables buying a property to be an ethical decision as well as a decision based on whatever else is important when deciding to buy i.e. location, proximity to schools if you have children etc

BobProperty wrote: »

The government could easily change the way we enforce the EU rules. This government won't, another one might. It won't "benefit us" as it will cost "us" lots of money to be told information that we can find out for nothing.

We've been over this, see my earlier post. The cost of the EPC can likely be recouped within a year if only the most basic recommendations are followed. The rest of the HIP is already currently paid for by the buyer so its not a new cost.

BobProperty wrote: »

Er, no-one? Those rating really slashed the sales of S Class Mercs, 7 series Beemers and Bentleys didn't they? Oh OK, people do look up the mpg figures of cars before they buy them, but do car sellers have to pay someone to individually give them a figure for every car they are selling?

If you look at the figures worldwide, the car companies that are doing well are those with the best fuel efficiencies to say nothing about the electric vehicle revolution coming very soon. Sure some very strong brands are resisting the building pressure for alternative fuels but everything has to change, nothing lasts forever if it refuses to change with the times. Including Mercs.

No, car sellers don't have to pay someone to individually come up with the mpg figure because cars come off production lines where due to standardisation in mass production, all specific models will have the same mpg. On the other hand, the same cannot be said of houses. Yes, some properties were built to the same regs and at the same time by the same people but in many cases they have been changed significantly over the years. E.g. old 1940s system built airy houses brought up to modern building regs with gutted frames and new brick skins (I did one of these recently - hard to spot!)This is the reason newbuild EPCs are done 'off plan' by full SAP assessors and EPCs for second hand homes are done by energy assessors like me (we need to look to see whats there but a SAP assessor does it off site).

BobProperty wrote: »

You just don't get it do you? The government had to put this into something because the EU has required the government it and came up with putting them in HIPs. Ever since HIPs were thought up more and more has been cut out of them until all that was left was the EPC. All that has happened since is spin, spin and more spin to try and convince the public that they are getting something for their money. There isn't an "educational challenge", it's government facing saving and most of the public can see through it or are sceptical.

No, the government didn't have to put the EPC in something. Other EU states do the EPC as a standalone document. In fact, the tories have said they would do as much if they got in (as if) so then EPCs would be done by people like me working for the energy companies (again, jobs for the boys).

I suggest you do your homework on HIPs, they contain far more than just an EPC: http://www.homeinformationpacks.gov.uk/consumer/3_Whats_in_a_Home_Information_Pack.html

I understand people are sceptical about HIPs. I'm here to address their misgivings. The EPC is an excellent idea and I'm proud to be an energy assessor. In time and IMO the document will be accepted as a normal part of the selling process. EPCs are here to stay!

BobProperty wrote: »

No. How will you tell which boiler heats which part of the central heating? What do you do if the boiler isn't on the SEDBUK database? What difference would it make depending on the answer to my first two question? What difference will it make to the overall assessment? (Will anyone be bothered?)

Regarding the organisation of your heating system, if it was ambiguous I would turn the thing on to see which rads heated up or I could ask you for starters since you're a plumber!

Also, if the boiler isn't on the SEDBUK database I would look for the GC number on the casing to match it up with the info in the instruction manual if its available. If the manufacturer's label or equivalent is still on the boiler I would cross check with the manufacturer's records with the GC number. There are also other methods we use but its too involved to go into here.

It would make a big difference to the EPC scores. The heating system (including boilers) and what fuel they use (if any) is one of biggest factors in determining the efficiency of a home.

I can't answer your question in any more detail than this without actually inspecting your property. Are you hinting that you secretly want me to arrange an inspection for you? For someone who professes a complete lack of interest in EPCs and HIPs you certainly seem very interested in the inner workings of Domestic Energy Assessments! :rotfl:

Peace!

BobProperty

chriserenity wrote: »

We do need HIs to perform Home Condition Reports, currently a voluntary document in the Home Information Pack. People ARE ordering HCRs.

Numbers please, I don't believe that they are.

chriserenity wrote: »

For those reading this thread who aren't that familiar with the HCR, it is a report produced by a trained Home Inspector (you have to train for about a year to perform this type of report). The report is paid for by the seller and tells the buyer what physical condition the property is in, the logic being the seller pays for this report once so all potential buyers can look at it rather than for example three potential buyers paying for three separate Chartered Surveyors to produce a parallel report so that money is wasted as the report is duplicated and doubly so if you don't end up buying the place.

Only problems are the vendor pays for it up front. It won't be as good as a survey (because HIs aren't surveyors) and it won't include a valuation which nearly always will be required by a lender. It was going to include a valuation originally but that fell through when all the lenders involved in the pilot study refused to accept a valuation paid for by the seller. So every buyer will still be paying for a valuation if you require a mortgage and every buyer will have wasted their money if the valuer or mortgage company turns them down.

chriserenity wrote: »

As you can see, there are vested interests craving to protect their core business who would love to see the HCR completely disappear to the detriment of consumers. Jobs for the boys as my its often called.

That's one way of looking at it. The "jobs for the boys" equally would apply to all those people who have trained for a useless government inspired scheme that has been forced on the public.

chriserenity wrote: »

The EU has made the right decision IMO. We NEED the EPC! Its moneysaving short and medium term as the EPC breaks down the improvements according to cost of installation so you can prioritise what to do when. Its moneysaving to the growing section of our society interested in the green credentials of whatever they buy. If you're not part that section I sincerely hope you change your mind!

People are able to find out all the energy saving info you need elsewhere and for little or no money. They don't need to pay someone to give them a rough idea of how to save energy in their homes.

chriserenity wrote: »

In terms of the long term, you have to think about the larger picture i.e. the alternative the human race will face if nothing is done about global warming. The cost of doing nothing will be measured in body counts and the adaptions we will be forced to spend money on to cope with a warmer, wetter climate.

As opposed to spending it on government inspectors now? Isn't employ an Energy Inspector or people will die a bit scaremongering? Looks like you really believe all that global warming, oceans rising tens of metres stuff but then it goes with the job doesn't it?

chriserenity wrote: »

The EPC enables buying a property to be an ethical decision as well as a decision based on whatever else is important when deciding to buy i.e. location, proximity to schools if you have children etc

One person in a million is going to be swayed by the energy rating of a house. If you are worried about getting your kids into a good school when you move house, the EPC won't matter one jot and you are deluded if you think otherwise.

chriserenity wrote: »

We've been over this, see my earlier post. The cost of the EPC can likely be recouped within a year if only the most basic recommendations are followed. The rest of the HIP is already currently paid for by the buyer so its not a new cost.

Like energy saving lightbulbs that the seller will take with them? Like the info already available on energy saving that people can get for free? And "the rest of the HIP.....is not a new cost" is bollards. Some of the costs are already paid for by the buyer or seller, the actually putting together of the HIP is a new cost and costs the seller. Also, what's the point of the EPC if the house doesn't sell? The vendor won't want to spend any money, they're trying to sell and get out of the place. There isn't a buyer to take up the recommendations in their "new home" because no one buys.

chriserenity wrote: »

If you look at the figures worldwide, the car companies that are doing well are those with the best fuel efficiencies to say nothing about the electric vehicle revolution coming very soon. Sure some very strong brands are resisting the building pressure for alternative fuels but everything has to change, nothing lasts forever if it refuses to change with the times. Including Mercs.

My point was that buyers of certain vehicles will take no notice of the fuel consumption figures and the sales of those vehicles show that. Your point is....what?

chriserenity wrote: »

No, car sellers don't have to pay someone to individually come up with the mpg figure because cars come off production lines where due to standardisation in mass production, all specific models will have the same mpg.

Maintenance and driving style don't come into it then? That guy who got 42mpg out of his Disco must have been making it up then?

chriserenity wrote: »

On the other hand, the same cannot be said of houses. Yes, some properties were built to the same regs and at the same time by the same people but in many cases they have been changed significantly over the years. E.g. old 1940s system built airy houses brought up to modern building regs with gutted frames and new brick skins (I did one of these recently - hard to spot!)This is the reason newbuild EPCs are done 'off plan' by full SAP assessors and EPCs for second hand homes are done by energy assessors like me (we need to look to see whats there but a SAP assessor does it off site).

But you don't work to .1 of an mpg, so yes, "the same cannot be said of houses" they'll just be given a band.

chriserenity wrote: »

.....I suggest you do your homework on HIPs, they contain far more than just an EPC: http://www.homeinformationpacks.gov.uk/consumer/3_Whats_in_a_Home_Information_Pack.html

I suggest you read back through this and other forums and see what a farce they have been, how they haven't "improved the home buying process" which is what they were originally sold as, and have a read of my many other comments about this farcical document.

chriserenity wrote: »

I understand people are sceptical about HIPs. I'm here to address their misgivings.

and keep my job?

chriserenity wrote: »

The EPC is an excellent idea and I'm proud to be an energy assessor. In time and IMO the document will be accepted as a normal part of the selling process. EPCs are here to stay!

Wooopy dooo! I won't be shedding a tear for you if the government changes the rules and puts you out of work, because your job is a government inspired overhead on the public. All you are is an unwanted cost on the overheads of selling a house.

chriserenity wrote: »

Regarding the organisation of your heating system, if it was ambiguous I would turn the thing on to see which rads heated up or I could ask you for starters since you're a plumber!

I don't work for nothing. Equally, I could BS you quite well into thinking my system worked in one particular way and you'd never know.

chriserenity wrote: »

I can't answer your question in any more detail than this without actually inspecting your property. Are you hinting that you secretly want me to arrange an inspection for you?

No thanks, I've a friend who is an energy inspector who would be willing to do it for me if required.

chriserenity wrote: »

For someone who professes a complete lack of interest in EPCs and HIPs you certainly seem very interested in the inner workings of Domestic Energy Assessments! :rotfl:

Peace!

A lack of interest? Please go back a couple of years and read all my previous comments. I find it interesting in that you have had all this training which will allow you to cut and paste some simple energy saving into a report, have a look round a house so that you can categorise it according to some government standard (er, it's a, er, call it an E) and put it into a document that one person in a million will take any notice of. This strikes me as nothing more than government inspired "Tiger Charm" selling. All citizens will be required to buy Tiger Charms, by law. Fine if you are a Tiger Charm salesperson, not moneysaving if you aren't. ( all including VAT of course, the government needs its cut, too.)