The landlords’ trade body has given a firm message to Housing Secretary Michael Gove - sort out a realistic deadline for changes to EPC requirements in rental properties, and stick to it!
Over the weekend Gove told the Daily Telegraph that his government should ‘relax the pace’ of EPC reforms expected from private landlords.
The paper reported over the weekend: “Mr Gove admitted that in his own department the government was ‘asking too much too quickly’ of landlords, who will be banned from renting out their homes unless they pay for green measures such as insulation and heat pumps to meet a new minimum energy efficiency threshold by 2028.”
And the Telegraph continued: “Citing existing financial pressures on landlords [Gove] added: ‘I think we should relax the pace.’"
In recent days Rightmove revealed that 16 per cent of homes listed on the portal had previously been let privately, and states that concerns over stricter Energy Performance Certificates were now the main reason for landlords selling.”
Specifically, Gove is quoted as saying: “My own strong view is that we’re asking too much too quickly. We do want to move towards greater energy efficiency, but just at this point, when landlords face so much, I think that we should relax the pace that’s been set for people in the private rented sector, particularly because many of them are currently facing a big capital outlay in order to improve that efficiency.”
Now the National Residential Landlords Association has spoken out, demanding clarity and a realistic timescale for any energy efficiency changes, once and for all.
Ben Beadle, chief executive of the National Residential Landlords Association, says: "It is over two years since the government completed its consultation on energy efficiency standards in rented homes. As a result of the delay in responding to this, there was never any hope of meeting the originally proposed deadlines, as we told [junior housing minister Lord Callanan] earlier this month.
"The NRLA wants to see properties as energy efficient as possible, but the sector needs certainty about how and when this will happen. Ministers need to develop a proper plan that includes a fair financial package to support improvements in the private rented sector. We will continue to work with all parties to develop pragmatic and workable proposals.”
Back in January 2021 the government closed its consultation on minimum energy efficiency standards for private rented housing.
It proposed that by April 2025 all new tenancies would need to be for properties with an energy performance rating of C or better and applied to all private rented housing by April 2028. It also proposed a national cap on the amount landlords would need to contribute to improvements of £10,000.
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Gove said the EPC assessment wasn't fit for purpose but we are still using it. Gove says we should delay EPC C but there is no new policy. With a reshuffle mooted & a GE around the corner it is no clearer what LLs will have to do and when. This is simply a mess!
Housing is not nimble. We need clarity & accurate dates. BTW anyone know Labour's policy on this? Could be all change again!
I can bet Labour won’t delay 😱 so whatever the 🐍 snake says, he won’t be around to see it through.
Starmer doesn't have a policy on anything :)
Tricia, I think you’ll find it’s the thousands of PRS houses and flats that are still energy wasteful are the ones ‘not fit for purpose’. The minority of ‘head in the sand’ landlords who have failed to regularly invest back into their assets are the ones causing hassle for the rest of us.
Martin. Stop talking rubbish. Example. 3 bed detached house fully insulated walls and ceilings, double glazing, new condensing bolier all lighting LED's. EPC rated as a "D".
Recommendations to achieive a "C" rating. Insulate floor, ( by destroying expensive solid oak block flooring throughout the ground floor), install heat pumps , install solar heating and finally install photovoltaic panels. Cost £20,000. Annual saving £101. Presumably only you would be daft enough to proceed. Me? I sold it.
Martin, I resent your implication. I invest regularly in my properties but the EPC algorithm is not for for purpose, preferring gas to electricity, penalising your beloved heat pumps etc. We on LLT are so fed up with your sanctimonious preaching - although at least you have someone content these days - would you please go & lose yourself somewhere? Or at least unplug yourself so your random Chatbox answers don't irritate the hell out oath rest of us?
So, I asked my EPC surveyor if he tested the walls to determine the depth and nature of internal cladding. No, he said they don't do penetrative tests but could examine any leftover materials to determine the properties. I asked him if there was any reason not to simply buy the thickest insulation board, break off a piece and hand it to him next time. That would work, he said. So, that, in a nutshell is EPC. Complete nonsense
Mr Bobby, NO system in the world can work if both parties act together to break the law, as you seem to be suggesting. Do you also recommend cheating at golf?
If you can't test the fabric of a building how can you meaure it?
Gibbo has had a busy weekend spouting pure nonsense AGAIN...
Give it a rest eh...
And correct Bob it is a joke, it should be very clear and concise and it is neither.
This is symbolic of a government in total disarray, my plan is still to sell as I don’t see Labour changing this, and I think we all know its they who will be in power.
I'm selling anyway... Whatever they change or don't change... The future doesn't look bright for landlords.
As they're almost certainly going to lose the next election anyway why don't they move the deadline to 2030 and announce there will be a 200% Super Tax Deduction for all improvements that increase an EPC score from April 2025 onwards? Didn't the last Labour government do something very similar when they introduced the 45% tax band a few weeks before losing an election?
The next government would then be seen as the bad guys hurting tenants if they scrapped the new deadline or tax break. Even if they watered it down it would still be better than the current complete lack of funding. Of course the logical solution would be to tweak the EPC algorithm so more houses are C rated anyway.
Moan, moan, moan. Change the record guys! If you’ve failed to steadily reinvest into your assets and they are STILL energy wasteful and not fit for purpose you really shouldn’t really be a landlord. First Law of investing - give something back to your asset to maintain its quality. Second Law of investing there is no such thing as ‘passive income’. PI is a lie.
You pretend to know it all, but you are as clueless as the rest of the tenant loving tories. None of my tenants want for anything and yet Gove wants them homeless. Ask any of them what an EPC is or means and they have no idea. All they want is security of tenure and affordable rents. That's what they get until EPC measures have them all sleeping on the street.....in the cold.
Gibbo, yet again you are talking utter nonsense. I have continually invested in all my assets and provided good quality homes for all my tenants. When you have to reinvest with no return and no chance of a return then it becomes unviable. At this point you sell the asset and there is no good quality home for anyone.
This is the point the PRS is at now. Idiotic posts you make are a complete waste of everybody's time...
a split infinitive and made up laws of investing.
Why don’t you just shut the f—k up & go away & aboy other people you total arse
Dislike
Oh dear Colin, you seem to have totally lost it with your disgusting language. None of us have any respect for posts like that. Try to maintain some self-control and appreciate that others can hold a different point of view to your own.
Well don’t read my posts, Little Pete. You don’t have to.
Gibbo My Old Fruitbat,
I need something to make me laugh during the day, you stick to walking round with your tinfoil hat on.
Amazed that all the decent comments on here are supported by the other right thinking people and all yours Zero..
Martin - I love reading your posts, it gives us a goal to aim for …… bringing you back from the dark side 😂😂 🚀 . The force was strong once with this one 😆😆
Wake up guys. The Energy Price Guarantee from the nanny state will cost me and other corporate tax payers £37 billion in REAL money. I don’t want to pay for this state subsidy for having the most energy wasteful housing stock in Europe. And I don’t want to pay it again and again when the next war starts, next unforeseen disaster occurs. If we make our buildings better and fit for purpose this risk goes again. Please tell me that you ‘get this’
I'm wide awake to this big con Martin
Martin, my husband and I are very responsible and have done all the reasonable improvements to our rental houses. Loft and cavity insulation, condensing boilers (best available at the time) TRVs, programmers, double glazing, LED lighting. All of our portfolio are C+ except one which would need external wall insulation and floor insulation at great cost for a small saving to the tenant. If made airtight as a modern house (even if that were possible with a 1930s build) it would also need a heat recovery ventilation system to avoid condensation and mould. I already charge a lower than market rent to help out the tenant who is a single mum. To deliver the necessary changes she will have to move out - to where as there is nothing affordable local to where her children go to school. As it is the changes are not economically viable so when the fixed term of the mortgage ends and I am faced with those massive costs she will have to leave anyway.
The house will be sold most likely to be an owner occupier who has no obligation to make the improvements and is unlikely to see the need.
So... the housing stock is not improved and my single mum tenant is either homeless, in emergency accommodation as there is no social housing, or struggling to pay £200 a month more for a PRS house from a lovely incorporated landlord. Except I am sure you wouldn't make the mistake of buying a genuinely uninhabitable house and bring it up to an EPC D.
Just advise me who wins here?
Beautiful post Emily and bang on point…..
As I said the other day a minimum requirement especially for older houses like DG, CH, Loft Insulation should be enough.
The best thing you can do is just sit and wait and make a decision when it’s clear what’s required. I’ve only seen Martin post on EPC articles, every one, and nothing else. Highly likely a part of extinction rebellion / Insulate Britain!
That's what I'm doing James
I am stringing it out as long as I can but I honestly think I will sell everything, if not the EPC mess then something else will be introduced. It’s never ending and tiresome.
whatever he's a part of,he strikes me as a pain in the derrière
He is an annoying fool - that is his purpose
I take Martin's points about the need to maintain assets, and also the desirability of energy efficiency, but simple economics have to bear on any improvements: My tenants want a home that is warm, dry, well-maintained and comfortable. They don't particularly want to move out for weeks (where? how? what cost?) so that solid walls can be internally insulated and floors dug up, they don't particularly want to pay an increased rent to align the smartened property with market rents, and *I* don't particularly want to pay £10,000 worth of improvements per property with a 10-year payback, assuming I can find the capital at all.
My old Victorian terraced houses are very nice comfortable homes, relatively cheap to buy, easy to look after, and popular as starter homes for singles or young couples who cant afford a huge rent. They are not cold, badly-maintained, nor 'unfit for purpose'. They are simply energy-inefficient compared to the latest specs.
I think part of the problem is that EPC's were designed to consider running costs, but are now being used as a CO2 tool. So we get the absurd situation where electric (to a large extent from renewables) is scored worse than gas. Also we have a couple of decent modern houses that are only just an EPC D, to make them into a C would entail a load of work with a payback (if I was paying the bills) of 200 years and the tenants would have to move out anyway. Far easier to just save the hassle and sell when the tenants move out and put the money elsewhere.
The houses are well maintained and comfortable (in fact I used to live in one of them), but just happen to be classified on an arbitrary scale as a D.
You're falling into a Green trap.
Victorian houses within walking distance of amenities are much greener than modern highly insulated rabbit hutches on peripheral estates which need multiple car journeys every day to access schools, offices, shops and other amenities. These rabbit hutches will probably be demolished long before the Victorian homes already around half way through their second century and probably not yet half way through their useful life.
The whole life environmental impact needs to be considered for everything - cars, houses, amenities etc.
Old Victorian houses are popular for renters, well built with a long life still in them, generally close to town/ city centres, schools and shops. never a problem finding a tenant for them
# sell sell sell
Last few years been buying classic cars, gives me lots of satisfaction, meet lovely people
And have an enjoyable hobby. They have shot up in value, ulez exempt no capital gains tax on sale no government interference (Yet) I will never invest in BTL again. I have 2 more 2 sell. I get 6% interest on capital and this will only improve as the clowns at the BOE continue to raise rates
Mr Gibbons.
I've been in the energy industry for over 50 years. The only green thing about green energy is that mugs that pay for it. The reason that energy prices shot up was that American banks gamed the system. And still are. Plus of course we are running down our energy extraction. I'm afraid that most governments have been determined to destroy Britain and are succeeding. It's pretty obvious you have a vested interest in green systems.
Please login to comment