Sadiq Khan wants EPC measures for the PRS reinstated

Reinstate whatever you want as long as its not Khan.

My first thought was that the EPC itself needs extensive alteration to make it a fair method for assessing the banding for any property. At the moment, the band assessment is very subjective and depends on the assessor rather than the method. Secondly, why are landlords the only ones who are required to upgrade to a C? Surely all property owners need to be included to improve energy use by the whole population. Or is this a bit too logical for Mr.Khan?

Hi looked at one of my houses epc document just to see the cost if i did all the work needed to take it from D to C £27.000,
Report says £350 plus a year saving i bet thats at the lowest rating figure and not a D , so for me to break even thats 77 years 😊. in the future at todays £350 yearly saving,
D rating houses are not cold draftey houses paint a bad picture Mr Khan
You just lost a few more rented homes as well Mr khan well done .

As we transition towards more sustainable energy sources, the need to make all of our old housing stock more energy efficient becomes less and less urgent.

Many of London’s old terraced housing (and anywhere else is pen the country) should be demolished to make way for modern homes fit for the 21st Century. We should move to building houses from sustainably sourced timber.

Ideal world and reality 12.6 million D and below

Reply to the comment left by Kate at 05/12/2023 - 16:27
That's true, the EPC is not very scientific in its assesment of a property. Some are marked down as D dispite having double glazing throughout, a new efficient condensation combi boiler, 450mm insulation in the loft, and upvc insulated doors, and cavity wall insulation, and LED lights. Yet another house can get the C standard grade with exactly the same upgrades. It's simply too inconsistent an assesment. Not to mention assessors who can't even be bothered to look in the loft to see if there is any insulation, and assume there isn't any, or bother to check if there is any cavity wall insulation, and just assume there isn't any. Maybe we should withhold payments for these assessments and assume they haven't been done throughly to warrant payment? It can't be beyond the wit of mankind to devise a fair and proper assesment that is consistent across all properties?
How about if it has upvc double glazing and 450mm roof insulation and cavity wall insulation and LED lights, and a gas condenser combi boiler or electric storage heaters, then it should be classed as a mandatory cat.C no exceptions. That would sort out 95% of the issues right there.
Then if you wanted to get to cat. B then you need solar panels and triple glazing.
Keeping it simple so everyone can understand how the assesment works would go a long way to making it more acceptable. Or is that too much like Logic for the govenment to handle?

Reply to the comment left by Frank Jennings at 05/12/2023 - 21:31
i agree with your comments. but most of the LL bashers dont deal in the real facts if it doesn't suit their cause. its a shame so many organisations can only focus on one side of the truth if it suits their argument. there have been so many posts on the ECP ratings over the last year or so from assessors who have stated many irregularities in the data base and the inconsistencies re the collection of the info of each property.
until this has been rectified no one should insist on anyone investing vast sums of money to improve their property's energy etc.
i am not against improving the energy on properties, but the way its measured i believe may not be fit for purpose. if i am made to improve my properties using a gauge which might be incorrect, then i can see in a few years time when the data is corrected, there will be multiple compensation claims against the UK govt.

At the moment and EPC E rating is required, with a cap of £3500 being imposed on the spending. Any expenditure from 2017 onwards will also count towards that cap (this is on the government website). I would expect something similar if EPC C is reintroduced. There are many ways to get a registered exception, the main one being the tenant refuses to have the work done due to disruption.

The EPC is not fit for purpose. That is the first thing that needs to be addressed.
Flats in blocks have very little control over what they can and cannot do and in London a lot of landlords are caught up in the socalled cladding scandal, having to pay for works that have nothing to do with cladding at all. Managing agents are using to do works that were never necessary before.
Why do tenants equate the difference between EPC D and C with a reduction in their energy bills? Nobody is talking about net zero and how that has increased our utility bills amongst other things.
Its all optics and getting votes, but people need to understand and not just follow what someone says which will not help them but actually make things worse for them.

Can someone PLEASE nail the box shut?

This clown keeps popping up time and time again....