Energy Performance Certificates should be abolished because they are outdated and not fit for purpose.
That is the view of well-known property commentator Russell Quirk who has written to the new minister for Brexit opportunities and government efficiency, Jacob Rees-Mogg, to share his thoughts.
Quirk say she was encouraged by his ‘friend’, and sister of Rees-Mogg, Annunziata, who suggested that he write to the MP following his recent plea to the masses for suggestions for which pointless EU directives should be abolished. He also has a column in The Sun in which he has asked for such suggestions.
“There is nothing more worthy of throwing in the bin labelled ‘EU guff’ than EPCs,” said Quirk. “So, I’ve written to him with a plea to abolish them.”
Quirk, in his letter, viewed by EYE, points out that he has been involved in the property sector as a business owner for 25 years and in that time has “not come across a thing so worthless as the obligatory EPC”.
Quirk says the certificate “must be produced for every one of the 1.5 million UK homes that are marketed for sale each year”.
He explained: “Each [certificate] costs between £50 and £90 and involves a visit by an inspector who ‘checks’ the light bulbs and the boiler in each home and then applies an A, B, C, D or E rating to the home.
“Ironically, in travelling by car to and from each property, these Domestic Energy Assessors are busily creating their own, huge carbon footprint which negates any advice that their silly certificates may advance in attempting to persuade current homeowners or future buyers to spend thousands in increasing the energy efficiency of the property.
“The upshot in all reality is that home buyers couldn’t give a fig about these EPCs nor their ratings. Since their introduction in 2006 under the then Labour government, there is no evidence that they have persuaded a single person to ‘invest’ in more environmentally friendly improvements to their home.
“Meantime, over the past 16 years, this pointless endeavour has cost the public about £1.5 billion – for zero benefit.”
“Get rid of them. Please,” he pleaded.
Comments (16)
EPC’s are as Barmy as Bojo’s Net Zero All three should be scrapped !
As I have said before, a system needs to be created to allow an EPC to be in real time i.e. when replacement windows are installed or new boiler fitted, the EPC reflects this rather than having to wait until an update is done, which tend to be done when a new EPC is legally required. This also allows for any change in methodology to show in real time.
Firstly, the UK were instrumental in the creation of the rules and regulations that lead to the implementation of EPCs. Under NO circumstances can the EU be blamed. It is not “their” bureaucracy, it is “our” bureaucracy.
Secondly, EPC’s are definitely not a worthless waste of time. Buyers are definitely paying attention. Tenants are also paying attention. With the huge hike in energy costs, I guarantee that everyone will be paying attention.
Importantly, surveyors are paying attention. Increasingly, the energy efficiency and sustainability of a building will effect the valuation placed upon it. If you think otherwise you are mistaken.
BUT, the current format of a standard EPC is wrong. It focuses on the cost of running the building, rather than its environmental impact. That’s a fault of the way the elements of the report are “calculated”.
I am refurbishing a flat and have been “forced” to install a gas boiler against my better judgement. I wanted to go all electric. (In fact I wanted to go with solar and a heat pump but that just isn’t viable for a 1960’s block of flats).
The reason I had to fit a gas boiler? Because I would get a low “D” or possibly even an “E” if I installed an electric system. Why? Simply because it costs more to run.
I suppose the clue is in the name “Energy Performance Certificate” rather than “Environmental Impact Report”.
But an “E” would possibly make the flat unsaleable to a percentage of buyers out there. It would also make the flat un-rentable in a few short years. And there is absolutely NOTHING extra I could do to improve the efficiency of the flat.
So, despite the certain knowledge that I am helping to destroy the planet, provided to me because I have no choice but to organise an Energy Performance Certificate, I have had to install a gas boiler.
All I can say in my defence is that I have done it in such a way that it can be easily replaced with an electric unit once the rules and regulations are properly updated.
Now, to be clear the mandate from
I’m no lettuce munching, sandal wearing, traffic stopping tree hugger but.. with uncontrollable, soaring, energy costs eating up an ever increasing percentage of peoples hard earned disposable.. running costs are becoming even more relevant.
A whole industry has built around these certificates. Peoples livelihoods and larger business’s are potentially at risk due to a few thinking they’re not “any good”. I’m not a fan, but the larger picture is out there and no one should be encouraged to ban them.
If I remember rightly wasn’t it part of the Kyoto treaty that Blair signed up to that we, as a country, would get an EPC on every property in the UK. That’s why it was the only thing retained after HIPS were abolished. Stealth work from the govt to get the people to pay for something the govt agreed to, without actually telling us.
An alternative would be to review the EPC and ensure they actually deliver on what they are meant to do. They are more articles about buyers starting to ask more about the energy efficiency of a home. They need to be fit for purpose.
Doubt anything will change given the governments plan to use EPCs to drive down the climate impact of the U.K. housing stock. Lenders have even started building mortgage products with preferential rates for those with good EPC ratings so whilst nothing meaningful has happened with the EPC doc since historically we are starting to see a change. After all what isn’t measured can’t be managed.
The article refers to Quirk as both a “He” and a “She” so a bit of a typo there, also a silly statement to state that an EPC inspector’s carbon footprint for producing the certificate negates any carbon reduction footprint that an EPC certificate may bring. Since 2006 I have probably signed up a couple of thousand tenants and not one have ever enquired about the potential energy benefits of an improved EPC so a valid point in that regard but improved EPC will improve the environment and help to reduce global warming. I say keep the certificate but be realistic about achieving a grade C unless full grant provision is made by the Government.
I don’t think I have ever had a tenant ask for it before they put in an application… They get a copy of it, obviously, but I very much doubt they even look at it!
We get the odd person asking about rating or know what the rating is; It’s a small number, but is increasing.
“Since their introduction in 2006 under the then Labour government…”
EPCs were not introduced until September 2007 – and then only on properties of four bedrooms or more. Three bedroom properties followed later that year. Only from 2008 was it mandatory to produce an EPC for any size property, with exceptions.
STICK TO THE SCRIPT!
“…a visit by an inspector who ‘checks’ the light bulbs and the boiler in each home and then applies an A, B, C, D or E rating to the home.”
Erm… what about the ‘F’ and ‘G’ ratings that can also be applied?
Another ad-lib gone badly, sadly wrong…
STICK TO THE SCRIPT!
“Quirk points out that the certificate must be produced for every one of the 1.5 million UK homes that are marketed for sale each year.”
NO IT DOESN’T!
Typical – as soon as he drifts off the script the ad-libs show him for what he is…
The first sensible thing Quirck has ever said….
What else do you expect – many others have said it before him so it was a tried and trusted “idea”!