By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Graham Awards


Landlords of homes with illegal EPCs threatened with enforcement

A council in the north of England has identified 166 private rental properties within the district that do not comply with new energy efficiency standards.

Mansfield council has been contacting all the landlords not meeting the new Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards; the council has been awarded £90,000 by the government to help enforce the new law.

Since April last year all rental property must have an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) at level A to E. Any that are ranked F or G have to make energy efficiency improvements to their properties, unless exempt. If they do not, they could be taken to court and fined up to £5,000. 


Councillor Marion Bradshaw says: "Although we have identified 166 private properties that are being rented out in breach of the new regulations, we suspect the actual number is much higher and we encourage tenants to contact us if they feel their home does not meet the new standards.

"We prefer to work with landlords to improve standards rather than wave a big stick at them. However, enforcement action is an option if landlords choose not to engage with the project."

Mansfield council is among 59 local authorities to be awarded funding by the Department of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy to enforce the new law. It has enabled the council to take on two enforcement officers, along with administration support, to target landlords who are renting properties that do not meet the Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards. The project will run until the end of March 2022.

Action to enforce the new law is being supported by the Midlands Energy Hub, a BEIS-funded agency that works with local authorities to help deliver the government's Net Zero Strategy. 

Michael Gallagher, head of the hub, says: “Through improving the quality of housing stock, the whole project looks to target over 95,000 of the worst-performing private rented homes with the ultimate aim of tackling fuel poverty and reducing carbon emissions produced by the domestic housing sector.”

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • George Dawes

    EPC = the tool to destroy the working and middle class who's only asset is their property

    Theodor Cable

    Why is improving their properties going to destroy the working and middle class?


    Because many properties are old and don’t lend themselves to the modern ‘improvements’. Not all houses can have cavity wall insulation, some houses have the cavity but were not designed for the insulation and end up having terrible damp and mould problems once this has been done. There’s a few changes you can make to boost the EPC that are not too expensive, but very quickly it escalates into tens of thousands of pounds for marginal gains. Then the technology that you’ve spent all that money on, needs maintenance costing more money.

    There are plenty of perfectly good houses now, that people won’t buy because they know they will be a government enforced money pit very soon. Which means there’s plenty of people who have spent their lives paying into a property which they very soon will struggle to sell because of EPCs. Some of these houses, by the way, are not even energy inefficient, they just don’t tick the boxes required for a high EPC.

    If you’re richer, and living in an old but huge house that is mortgage free - you can happily ignore all of this, because you’ll never need to sell or remortgage. This is why EPC regs are aimed squarely at middle classes. Before you know it the goalposts will shift again and the government will no doubt be insisting on grade B for houses to keep the private-jet-net-zero-elite crowd happy.

    • AQ
    • 08 November 2021 08:37 AM

    Take your meds George

  • icon

    many cannot be improved

  • icon

    Is anyone able to clarify the situation with epc’s for me? Much I have read states that all rented property requires an epc, yet the gov.uk guidelines to landlords states that it’s only for property marketed for sale or let or modified in the last 10 years. I have rented out to the same tenants on the same assured tenancy for 20 years. I had thought that this meant that the requirements for an epc of ‘E’ or less didn’t apply. Am I wrong?


    You are wrong I'm afraid - it is illegal to rent out a property without an EPC of E or better unless you have an exemption in place.


    I had a look and the government website is not great as it initially suggests you don’t need one. Then I read further down and found the following sentence:

    From 1 April 2020 the prohibition on letting F and G properties will extend to all relevant properties, even where there has been no change in tenancy.

    So it does actually appear that you would need to have an EPC carried out and start to take action if it finds your property is F or G.

    Google “ minimum energy efficiency standard - landlord guidance“ to find the government website with all the information, including how much you need to spend before you can get an exemption etc.


    I had a G rated property, got it up to an F , had a MEES report done it said the cost to get to an E would be £14k, applied for and got an exemption, they are happy long term tenants in there so I am likely okay until 2028 , given that I only paid £13k for the property 26 yrs ago I'm not too bothered.


    Useful responses thanks. I’m not a ‘proper’ landlord. I own the property that my parents live in for a nominal rent. Any major works to improve the EPC rating is going to prove financially very difficult and could ultimately lead to the local council having to house them. That’s really not something I want to do to parents in their 80’s.

  • icon

    Very true, Steve Austin.. WE have a complete idiot running the government implementing communist crap, and an opposition full of crap. Most insulation is derived from oil (can be coal) so its either burn it to keep warm or plasticise it as insulation. Most people seem to forget that you need ventilation to get rid of moisture and stale air and bring in fresh air to breathe. So therefore that is quite an energy loss.
    When are the Royal Family going to give up the queens flight ? They must have one helluva carbon footprint.


    The Queen has often used the train :) I think the senior Royals are probably better than the Politicians for at least trying to travel in a less polluting way - did you see Biden and his 30 car entourage, flown over from the US to drive around Europe? And Boris flying a private plane from COP26?

  • icon

    £90,000 would go some way to upgrading/insulating homes.

    Initially, EPCs were required as a result of legislation originating from Europe around 2008 that required the information be provided to prospective buyers or tenants. If the property has not been marketed since 2008, then they were not required. Also, if the EPC has expired (10 years+ old) and the property has not been offered for let since expiry, then there was no requirement to get a new one. I’m not aware that this situation has been changed.

    Maybe it’s in the latest legislation though. If this is the case, then surely all properties without EPCs and all properties with expired EPCs as of 1/4/21 would immediately require new EPCs? Doesn’t seem right?

  • icon

    I think you will find that the royal family use the queens flight RAF a lot. I know Prince Charles was jetting around europe in a rather large aircraft, a voyager I believe. Quite simple traqnsfer the queens flight to operational duties for the RAF, they certainly need planes and pilots. Why does the queen need her own train ?
    Buckingham palce has 350 bedrooms, make an ideal hostel for all the illegal immigrants pouring into Britain .


    I have respect for our Queen, Anne and Edward, the rest of them are an expensive waste of space, when our Queen dies that should be the end of the royals, the money saved and a reduced carbon foot print would be large

  • icon

    Edwin Morris. Why should 350 migrants get to live at an exclusive address free of charge before me a British born tax payer?

    Theodor Cable

    Rather a good question I would say.

  • icon

    Jo Jo quite agree but the goverment is putting up uillegal immigrants in 4 star hotels, so the queen could share the taxpayers burden. I note that the queen has had a weekend break at sandringham and has flown back by helicopter.


    So much for her carbon foot print, lead by example mam, just as Boris and nut nuts are doing, or are they ??


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up