When the UK Government unveiled its consultation on domestic Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs), it sparked a blend of anticipation and concern, particularly within the private rented sector. To delve deeper into the ramifications of these proposed changes, I engaged in a thoughtful dialogue with James Harrington, a seasoned estate manager and a proactive member of the Country Land and Business Association (CLA). James collaborates closely with Avril Roberts, the CLA’s Senior Policy Adviser, who has been instrumental in scrutinising the government’s proposals. Our conversation illuminated the potential impacts these changes could have on landlords and property managers across England and Wales.
Focus360 Energy: property compliance services – pre-planning to post-construction. Learn more.
James welcomed me into his modest yet inviting office, nestled on the perimeter of a vast estate he oversees. The walls, adorned with framed photographs of the countryside, mirrored his profound connection to rural England. As we settled into our discussion, James began to unravel the complexities of the government’s consultation process.
“The consultation is quite comprehensive,” James remarked, reaching for a voluminous binder filled with notes and highlighted excerpts. “It’s set to significantly reform EPCs, which have been pivotal for any property transaction since 2008. Crucially, these changes are intertwined with the broader governmental agenda of achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050.”
One of the prominent proposals James highlighted involves a complete overhaul of the metrics listed on EPCs. “Presently, we rely on the Energy Efficiency Rating (EER) and the Energy Impact Rating (EIR). However, the government is proposing six new metrics, focusing on energy cost, fabric performance, heating systems, smart readiness, carbon, and energy use. Curiously, they suggest excluding ‘carbon’ and ‘energy use’ as headline metrics, which has certainly raised some eyebrows.”
When asked about the rationale behind omitting these metrics, James offered insights. “The reasoning,” he explained, “is that incorporating carbon and energy use might not directly catalyse the changes necessary to reduce fuel bills or achieve net zero. Moreover, there’s the matter of embodied carbon and the variability of emissions factors over time. It’s a complex balancing act.”
Another significant proposal James pointed out is the expansion of trigger events necessitating an EPC. “Currently, an EPC is only required when selling, letting, or marketing a property. The consultation proposes adding the expiration of an EPC as a trigger event, which has been a grey area for many property owners.”
This potential change might necessitate landlords ensuring a valid EPC throughout the tenancy period. “It would undoubtedly increase the administrative burden,” James acknowledged, “but it could also ensure that properties maintain energy efficiency continuously rather than solely at the point of sale or let.”
Our discussion extended to the implications for short-term rental properties, which are currently exempt if the occupier isn’t responsible for energy costs. “The consultation suggests requiring EPCs for all short-term lets, which could significantly impact holiday homes,” James elaborated. “It’s about ensuring all rented properties meet a certain standard, irrespective of rental duration.”
James expressed particular concern for heritage buildings, which are currently exempt from EPC requirements to preserve their character. “The proposal to mandate EPCs for all heritage buildings is controversial. There’s a genuine fear in the heritage sector about potential impacts on the historical and architectural integrity of these properties.”
We also touched on the validity period of EPCs, currently set at 10 years. “They’re contemplating reducing this to anywhere between less than two years to seven years. If they pursue a shorter validity period, it could mean more frequent assessments and potentially higher costs for property owners.”
James emphasised that the consultation represents a preliminary stage—proposals subject to modification based on stakeholder feedback. “It’s imperative for property owners to engage with the consultation process,” he urged. “We must ensure the final regulations are practical and don’t impose undue burdens.”
As our conversation drew to a close, James reflected on the broader implications for CLA members. “Nine out of ten CLA members own properties in the private rented sector. These changes will directly impact them, not only financially but administratively as well.”
He leaned back in his chair, a contemplative expression crossing his face. “Ultimately, it’s about striking the right balance between meeting environmental objectives and supporting property owners. The consultation is a step in that direction, but much work remains.”
Leaving James’ office, it became clear that while the proposals are still in the consultation phase, the potential changes to EPCs could significantly reshape the landscape for property owners in the UK. Engaging with the process, as James wisely advised, seems not only prudent but essential to ensure that the future of property management aligns with both environmental aspirations and economic realities.
Be the first to comment