Govt. plans to target mortgages to EPC's could leave many homes unsaleable

Norman_Castle

BikingBud said:

Norman_Castle said:

MaryNB said:

Chandler85 said:

While EPC are full of assumptions, because lets face it, the guy has about 10 minutes to do it, they will continue to be ignored unless mortgage companies force them to be taken into account.  Which makes the system worse, if you have people who assume things and then give you a rubbish EPC, so you can't sell your house as easily due to a 10 minute assessment.

For them to be useful they need to be done properly, not all double glazing is the same.  I've seen double glazed houses that the EPC says needs the single glazed windows replacing etc, and these are new EPCs.  It is like the assessor just doesn't look.  Though to be fair, I had a surveyor tell me a glazed internal door was not safety glass and needed replacing due to being dangerous.  The door had laminated glass in it and was perfectly safe, the glass even said in the corner it was laminate...

I lived in a rental flat with an EPC of E. The flat about us had an EPC of C. The only differences were we had energy efficient bulbs, the flat above didn't, and we got marked down for having no roof insulation, the flat above us didn't because there was another flat above it. Load of nonsense. 

My EPC doesn't mention loft insulation as apparently there's another flat above mine. I didn't notice one when in my loft accessed by the loft hatch the assessor looked up at. It also estimates my current costs as three times what they are and claims I could save an amount almost equal to the actual costs.

So did you object? Request it to be rewritten, bring it to the attention of the accreditation scheme?

No, CBA. I've insulated and draft proofed in ways an EPC wouldn't recognise. I'm happy to take responsibility for insulating my home.

another_casualty

Doozergirl said:

another_casualty said:

Doozergirl said:

You should probably re-read your signature and follow your own advice, @another_casualty


Have you read the thread?  There's a
sensible conversation happening, which you're welcome to join.  

Thanks@Doozergirl for the advice . 

This is true it is a sensible conversation which I have joined.
I'm trying to work out how am I supposed to pay for a new boiler for example if my present one is ripped out . How much would it cost to pay to get a Victorian converted flat up to standard ? Why should  we pay ? Obviously loft insulation isn't much of an issue . 

Home owners have a responsibility to maintain their properties etc but for all of this green issue to be rammed down our throats by 2030 when we will still have to pay for everything doesn't seem possible .   It is possible I have got the wrong end of the stick of course..

Your choice is to pay either in upgrading the house or in increasing energy costs.  Fossil fuels are a finite resource, even if you don't care about your own consumption.  

I have insulted many, many houses over a period of two decades. We've had a very long time to start taking this seriously.  There's no throat ramming.    The state of our planet shouldn't be a party political thing but some will offer to help consumers more than others.  If you're not going to vote for anything then you will get what you are given.  

Can't argue about that . As a "floating voter" over the years , I may vote / may not
I will get what is given anyway . I'll leave it there..

Chandler85

The more long term answer is surely to upgrade the electricity infrastructure to everywhere and also increase power generation from renewal sources, such as tidal, wind, solar, hydro electric etc.  Maybe Nuclear as well.

Then have electric charging for cars more available at homes, increase electricity available at homes as well.  Then the ability to use electric boilers, which are more expensive now because electricity is so expensive.  If you make electricity equivalent to gas or similar enough then you start to fix the problem.  It is also easier to "move" electricity across larger areas and share i between different companies.

I imagine worldwide there is 10,000s of Gigawatts wasted daily through overproduction of power overnight etc, as you can't just turn off power stations, which if shared would help solve the problem as well.

Obviously older homes do need insulating as much as possible but some homes will ultimately need knocking down to solve the problem fully, and given we don't build enough homes currently, knocking down properties doesn't seem the best idea currently.

Slinky

Chandler85 said:

Obviously older homes do need insulating as much as possible but some homes will ultimately need knocking down to solve the problem fully, and given we don't build enough homes currently, knocking down properties doesn't seem the best idea currently.

But how green is knocking down a leaky home and rebuilding a better insulated one? The carbon footprint of the materials used in the new home is going to outweigh the benefits for many many years to come surely?

BikingBud

another_casualty said:

Doozergirl said:

You should probably re-read your signature and follow your own advice, @another_casualty


Have you read the thread?  There's a
sensible conversation happening, which you're welcome to join.  

Thanks@Doozergirl for the advice . 

This is true it is a sensible conversation which I have joined.
I'm trying to work out how am I supposed to pay for a new boiler for example if my present one is ripped out . How much would it cost to pay to get a Victorian converted flat up to standard ? Why should  we pay ? Obviously loft insulation isn't much of an issue . 

Home owners have a responsibility to maintain their properties etc but for all of this green issue to be rammed down our throats by 2030 when we will still have to pay for everything doesn't seem possible .   It is possible I have got the wrong end of the stick of course..

Maybe you do or maybe you don't pay for a boiler upgrade but when you come to sell we should expect that properties that are less energy efficient do not attract the same prices as those that are. The purchaser who previously planned on a new kitchen may now refocus and decide that the roof needs redoing and the CH needs overhauling and offers £20-25K less to cover this. Seems reasonable to me.

Is it really just a green issue? - If so then why not sit and burn £10/£20 or £50 notes to keep warm? We are discussing it because of the financial impact, we are after all on a money-saving site.

Reality - as taxpayers and consumers, we pay for everything!

Niv

martindow said:

Niv said:Mine is 400 yo and part cob and obviously no cavity walls etc. I think a D rating would be an achievement!

I would imagine tht a thick cob wall could have quite good insulating properties.

Indeed but not taken into account by the EPC system

Jenni_D

Doozergirl said:

I have insulted many, many houses over a period of two decades.

How did the houses feel about that?  

Doozergirl

Jenni_D said:

Doozergirl said:

I have insulted many, many houses over a period of two decades.

How did the houses feel about that?  

😂😂😂

It's just as true as the sentence I meant to write!  

I have insulted MANY more than I have insulated.  

[Deleted User]

Doozergirl said:

another_casualty said:

Doozergirl said:

You should probably re-read your signature and follow your own advice, @another_casualty


Have you read the thread?  There's a
sensible conversation happening, which you're welcome to join.  

Thanks@Doozergirl for the advice . 

This is true it is a sensible conversation which I have joined.
I'm trying to work out how am I supposed to pay for a new boiler for example if my present one is ripped out . How much would it cost to pay to get a Victorian converted flat up to standard ? Why should  we pay ? Obviously loft insulation isn't much of an issue . 

Home owners have a responsibility to maintain their properties etc but for all of this green issue to be rammed down our throats by 2030 when we will still have to pay for everything doesn't seem possible .   It is possible I have got the wrong end of the stick of course..

Your choice is to pay either in upgrading the house or in increasing energy costs.  Fossil fuels are a finite resource, even if you don't care about your own consumption.  

I have insulted many, many houses over a period of two decades. We've had a very long time to start taking this seriously.  There's no throat ramming.    The state of our planet shouldn't be a party political thing but some will offer to help consumers more than others.  If you're not going to vote for anything then you will get what you are given.  

Problem is a lot of people, especially FTBs, are struggling to afford houses already. With extra cost an no assistance it's just going to make the situation worse.

Section62

Chandler85 said:

While EPC are full of assumptions, because lets face it, the guy has about 10 minutes to do it, they will continue to be ignored unless mortgage companies force them to be taken into account.  Which makes the system worse, if you have people who assume things and then give you a rubbish EPC, so you can't sell your house as easily due to a 10 minute assessment.

For them to be useful they need to be done properly, not all double glazing is the same.  I've seen double glazed houses that the EPC says needs the single glazed windows replacing etc, and these are new EPCs.  It is like the assessor just doesn't look.  Though to be fair, I had a surveyor tell me a glazed internal door was not safety glass and needed replacing due to being dangerous.  The door had laminated glass in it and was perfectly safe, the glass even said in the corner it was laminate...

I touched on this point the other day.  The current EPC system is rubbish in part because people don't treat it seriously.  It is a number and letter that most people ignore - other than complying with the law requiring them to get one if they sell their property.

If the stakes are upped - i.e. whether or not your property is mortgageable depends on the assessment - then people will start taking them more seriously and pay for a quality report produced by an expert, rather than some nonsense churned out by an ex-salesperson who did an hour-long online 'training' course.

If the framework for producing quality EPCs is not right (it isn't) then there will also be consumer pressure for change - e.g. using NIV's example that cob walls are recognised for the thermal performance they have, rather than ignored because they aren't "insulated cavity walls".

People are going to need to pay for good quality energy assessments (in the same way some pay for a level 3 survey) if they want to demonstrate their (non-standard) property actually has a performance level far in excess of the nonsense the current box-ticking exercise produces.

The incentive to do that will be when buyers find they can't get a mortgage for a property with poor energy efficiency (under the current system) and the vendors realise they need to pay for a more representative report.

Or perhaps the roles need to be reversed and - as with surveys - the EPC needs to be produced on the buyer's behalf, with a costed plan for energy efficiency improvements included as part of the mortgage application (and funding reserved to do this).