Landlords press on with EPC upgrades despite shelved regulations

Landlords press on with EPC upgrades (to help save the planet).

Meanwhile, in Ukraine and Gaza…

What is the point?

I cannot understand why anyone would spend money until they know what changes Labour will make when they win the election.

I would argue that given the current climate (cost of living and political environment), any work carried out by LL's at the moment is just to tick off the basics and make the property rentable. There is no incentive to pay out for works where legislation does not require it as necessary to let at the moment.
IF at the same time there is the opportunity to MAYBE carry out some intrusive works like internal insulation (or example) IF the property is empty and between tenancies, inevitably this is (arguably) a good way of achieving better insulation then POSSIBLY the work can be said to be done in part for a better EPC rating but it wont be done just for this as its a big outlay for very little return for the LL UNLESS a higher rent can be achieved.
Another misleading headline and statistic.

Given that upgrading EPC ratings has not and probably will never be required for owner-occupied properties, a fair solution is that landlords must declare what the rating is and tenants can then decide whether to pay the asking rent.
Many properties are difficult and some are all but impossible to upgrade at reasonable cost. Without vacant possession, it is harder and more expensive.

The clumsy hand of Government proposed Draconian fines for landlords and the requirement to spend substantial sums every five years, regardless of the value of the property or whether such expenditure would achieve a C rating.

Fortunately, someone realised that making hundreds of thousands of properties unlettable would not be good for tenants or landlords. Whether Labour has the brains to work this out remains to be seen. Once section 21 goes, landlords may be stuck with a tenant but unable to upgrade.

Landlords pulling in £2000 a month rent on a high value property can afford to proactively upgrade their EPC ratings. Many other landlords at the other end of the scale will find the cost of EPC upgrades is a significant percentage of their house value and will swallow up more than a year’s rent. These landlords who tend to house the poorest tenants will wait until push comes to shove and then decide if it’s better to evict (if they still can) and carry out the upgrades and rent again at a higher rate to recover costs, or just sell up and be done with it. Either way the existing tenants will lose out.

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 17/04/2024 - 12:41
any new proposals, even if legislation demands it, any works can only be carried out IF a tenant gives permission to access.

All it takes is for the LL to explain to the tenant that IF they have to carry out this work, it will cost X and that as a result there will be an increase in rent to X.
The tenant can then refuse and exemption can be applied for that lasts up to 5 years max (and can be reapplied for thereafter). If the tenant leaves before this, then yes the LL would have to carry the works out to be able to carry on letting (if no other exemption can be gained) BUT at that stage there is a perfect opportunity to decide what to so as they have secured vacant possession so, if uneconomic to carry out the works, they can sell.

There is also no legal compulsion for a LL to seek possession of a property where a tenant refuses access for any reason as it stands and I can't see that being changed considering the emphasis is for the government to keep tenants (especially benefit claimants) in their properties for as long as possible so they don't have to deal with housing them, themselves.

The way its going with the RRB you may have to give