Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) continue to make headlines, and unfortunately, it’s once again for the wrong reasons.
A recent investigation by Which? uncovered numerous inaccuracies in a sample of EPCs tested. Which? selected 12 homeowners from England, Wales, and Scotland, arranging EPC assessments for them during February and March 2024 to test their accuracy and the usefulness of the recommendations.
The investigation revealed various issues with both the accuracy of the EPCs and the recommendations given to homeowners. Eight out of 11 homeowners believed their EPCs were inaccurate, noting that key aspects of their homes, such as windows, roofs, and heating systems, were described incorrectly. Another homeowner didn’t even receive their report.
One EPC recommended changes that could save £920 a year on energy bills, but the total estimated cost meant it could take up to 29 years to break even. In another case, significant errors in the EPC were corrected, improving the energy efficiency rating from D to B.
Unfortunately, this isn’t surprising. The current EPC system is limited in what assessors are required to do, a situation exacerbated by some assessors handling multiple assessments in one day, often at very low costs. The barrier to entry for becoming a qualified Domestic Energy Assessor (DEA) is quite low, which is concerning given the importance of accurate EPCs.
At Warren Property Matters, we have a national team of accredited DEAs who are also RICS-qualified surveyors, ensuring a high standard of energy assessments. However, not all assessors across the UK meet this level of qualification.
Change is on the horizon. New rules are being introduced to make EPCs more detailed and accurate. The new model will require a more thorough investigation of properties, including more precise measurements of window openings and radiator sizes, allowing for accurate heat loss calculations for each room. This will increase the time and effort required, and consequently, the fee for an EPC assessment.
However, the new calculations still lack an implementation date, and the EPC will continue to have its limitations because it is based on the cost of heating the house rather than focusing on carbon usage. At one point, there was momentum towards changing EPCs to calculate carbon output, but this seems unlikely to happen now, as it would complicate the status of the estimated 16 million EPCs currently in circulation.
There also needs to be a debate around how the efficiency of energy-efficient measures, such as heat pumps, is recorded. For example, while the running costs of an air source heat pump might appear higher than those of a boiler, new models are constantly being developed that are more efficient and potentially cheaper to run.
The continued focus on cost rather than net-zero goals is problematic. Recent figures from Rightmove showed that at least 18 million homes have an EPC rating of D or below, equating to over half (55%) of all UK housing stock.
Rightmove gives the example of the average energy bill for a three-bedroom house with an EPC rating of F being £4,431 per year, compared to £1,669 for the same size house with an EPC rating of C. Clearly, upgrading these homes is essential to lower running costs and reduce carbon emissions.
While the new assessments may not show a property’s carbon output, they should provide a more accurate picture for homeowners and bring increased professionalism to the sector. As we strive towards the crucial C rating, assessors must ensure accuracy in their evaluations.
In conclusion, while EPCs are a valuable tool for understanding a property’s energy efficiency, the system needs significant improvements. By addressing the current shortcomings and focusing on both cost and carbon output, we can better support homeowners in making informed decisions about their properties and contribute to the UK’s net-zero goals.
