Challenging an EPC

Nsar2

MWT said:

Nsar2 said:

This the EPC. The partial cavity wall is noted but it's not clear the insulated suspended floor in c. 25% of the floor area is included here but the assessor said it was noted. I asked him about heating water heating by solar for about 5 months of the year and he just said that can't be counted and that the main reason is the cost of fuel which is just nuts.

Nothing looks 'wrong' there it is mostly the oil fired heating/water heating that is a big negative, and the lack of cavity walls all round so having the insulation isn't as helpful as it could be.

Similarly I suspect the double -glazing was not using high rated glass, or you couldn't evidence it if it was.

You will have got points for having solar PV, but while you have the oil heating they are not going to give you more points for how you use the solar PV. 

Nothing obvious there that you could appeal unfortunately. 

The EPC process is not as scientific or as comprehensive as it could be, but it is quick and cheap. 

What I find baffling is that substantial improvements to both insulation and the amount of energy the house consumes have resulted in a worse rating, all other factors being equal. 

Nsar2

Qyburn said:

Nsar2 said:

I asked him about heating water heating by solar for about 5 months of the year and he just said that can't be counted and that the main reason is the cost of fuel which is just nuts.

Is there any form of control on water heating from the cooker?  I would expect to be gravity, and no way of a cylinder thermostat doing anything.

No it's an AGA which has a rudimentary thermostat and if we empty the tank it does have an impact on the AGA but it's a very slow cause and effect.

Nsar2

HillStreetBlues said:

I found my dream home, but I can't buy it as only 44 points not 50!  Does anyone believe that would happen?

The cost of heating a place is surely something everyone considers when looking at a property. Unlikely to be a deal breaker but a rating that suggested horrible energy bills for the next X years is something I'd use in the negotiation, when in reality our electricity supplier now pays us and we've put a reasonable sized hole in our oil consumption. But the EPC says it's got worse not better since 2004. 

matt_drummer

People can see through it.

If you are selling your hose just show people the actual cost.

The epc doesn't matter.

My house costs nothing to run in energy costs, in fact it's an income.

It doesn't matter what the epc says.

The bills don't lie!

Nsar2

Update: I have had two emails from the assessor's training organisation 3 hours apart, from the same person, which says the the cost of fuel is part of an EPC and also not part of an EPC!
They also say that new regs on June 15th (after the assessment) would have taken the PV into account but this is simply untrue, the new regs in June 15th recognise whether a smart meter is or isn't sending export data. 
Basically it feels like EPC's are a complete waste of everyone's time and money because the quality of data into the assessment is garbage and the regulation of assessors is a sham.
Perhaps Mr Lewis might turn his attentions to this!

QrizB

Nsar2 said:

Basically it feels like EPC's are a complete waste of everyone's time and money because the quality of data into the assessment is garbage and the regulation of assessors is a sham.

That does neatly sum up the general swell of opinion of EPCs on this forum, yes.

FreeBear

QrizB said:

Nsar2 said:

Basically it feels like EPC's are a complete waste of everyone's time and money because the quality of data into the assessment is garbage and the regulation of assessors is a sham.

That does neatly sum up the general swell of opinion of EPCs on this forum, yes.

Had been looking at EPCs for properties along my road. One in particular caught my eye as it claimed timber framed construction on the upper half. Nope. Solid brick wall, same as mine.

matt_drummer said: If you are selling your house just show people the actual cost.

For me, that would be misleading. Gas is currently under 3000kWh p.a. (electricity at 1600kWh). During winter, the thermostat is set to 17-19°C depending on the time of day/week, and I use a log burner on colder evenings.

A similar property a few doors down is using 9000kWh of gas and 2300kWh of electricity. Still less than the 10000kWh EPC estimate (plus another 4000kWh for DHW).

Bilivino

2004? EPCs weren’t introduced until 2007. Also the fuel prices used in the methodology are fixed so there is no state of ‘flux’ in the ratings.

Nsar2

Bilivino said:

2004? EPCs weren’t introduced until 2007. Also the fuel prices used in the methodology are fixed so there is no state of ‘flux’ in the ratings.

Sorry 2014.
That's my point about the EPC just done. The assessor and his training body Elmhurst have both said that the reason that the rating has fallen (even though the insulation and energy consumption of the property have been radically improved since 2014) is because fuel prices have risen.
They seem unable to answer basic questions and are now blaming it on new regs introduced in June which recognise the presence of batteries with PV. This is a partly true answer because prior to June the presence of PV was aknowledged (but not batteries) but they can't say what impact the PV has had on the ratings other than to say "it would have been worse". The fact that I'm a net exporter of electricity now and my oil consumption has fallen a lot because a lot of my water heating is by solar is simply disregarded.
They also didn't ask for my MCS certificate so their assessement of my PV array is based on percentage of the roof area which itself is rubbish because the panels are on an attached barn which does not form part of the main house whci is what they are rating. It's a mess.

Stubod

I have found that EPC ratings are carried out by people with no real practical experience (and limited knowledge), probably after completing a few hours of "online" tick box training. A bit of a gravy train really. 

I never pay them too much attention, and would always ask for the actual heating costs.

A typical, "seems like a good idea" governement scheme that has not been properly thought through or implemented correctly.