Are decision-makers suffering from delusions of competence on EPC rules?

Bad Policy Example: From 2028, it is suggested that all new tenancies must have an EPC rating of ‘C’ or above, with all existing tenancies required to meet this target by 2030.

Why is this bad Policy?

1. Millions of houses are below ‘C’ and won’t be a ‘C’ for 2028. These properties will then be removed from the rental sector. With fewer properties available, a growing population and insufficient new builds, then what does the government think will happen to rents? Assuming the number of renters remains constant and fewer rental houses are available this government will be attacking tenants as they cull the supply.

Further, the government thinks landlords should spend up to £15k on a property to achieve a £240 a year saving for the tenant on hearing bills. The math would show it would take 40 years to get your money back, a horrendous return.

Here’s what good policy looks like!

Invest the money in nuclear power stations – Use competent builders to achieve a five years build and allow them allow people access to sufficient low cost green energy to cheaply heat homes supplemented with wind and solar. An abundance of cheap energy.

They say they want growth yet run policies of shrinkage. Perhaps the decision-makers suffer from delusions of competence?

What does the property118 community think?

Thanks,

Paul