Call to impose EPC rules on landlords as tenants ration energy

Reply to the comment left by Peter G at 03/10/2025 – 12:16
Whilst there are no energy efficiency performance standards for social housing at the moment,the government is consulting on introducing a requirement for band C for socially rented homes by 2030.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/improving-the-energy-efficiency-of-socially-rented-homes-in-england/improving-the-energy-efficiency-of-socially-rented-homes-in-england

The Scope of the Consultation is described as:
——————————————————————
Topic of this consultation:

This consultation seeks views on the implementation of new Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards (MEES) for the social rented sector at Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) Band C OR EQUIVALENT by 2030. It covers the following areas:

setting a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard

addressing implementation issues

longer-term decarbonisation and Net Zero

Scope of this consultation:

Social Housing Regulation and Net Zero.

Geographical scope:

These proposals relate to England only.

Impact assessment:

The attached impact assessment published alongside this consultation sets out the expected impacts (costs and benefits) of the proposals made in this consultation.

——————————————————————-

I don’t have time to read the consultation so I don’t know what ‘OR EQUIVALENT’ [to EPC band C] actually means.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 03/10/2025 – 12:23
Following that, it’ll be owner occupied homes, the EU already has plans to enforce upgrading, and if not carried out, the work will be undertaken publicly and a charge placed on the property if the owner cannot pay it, this is communism or corporate fascism, the funny thing is that the NSDAP had home ownership (one) as a central policy and they built hundreds of thousands to strict quality standards, many remaining in use today.

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 03/10/2025 – 13:14
I don’t know anything at all about the German Nazi party’s building policies for domestic housing. But it wouldn’t surprise me if many of the houses were still in use today if they weren’t flattened by Arthur “Bomber” Harris.

I believe that Adolf Hitler may have been wrongly credited with building the first autobahn….wrongly because plans for the autobahn were in place before the first world war….that story that Adolf Hitler was responsible for autobahns was just a myth. Even if people still live in houses built by the Nazis I’m not sure that’s a negative…what would be the public benefit in tearing them down?

I do think that though if a tenant isn’t allowed to rent a band D, E or F property if that suits the tenant then ours is not a free society. Obliging tenants to rent Band C properties doesn’t do anything either for tenants or for climate change.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 03/10/2025 – 14:33
Technically the first motor vehicle only road was built in Italy, as to German plans, the pre WWII (actually 1913/21) wasn’t ‘a road’ but a 19km test/racing track for which it is still used, There were two relatively short pre NSDAP routes built but Hitler certainly ‘broke ground on the larger network but shock horror, a politician wrongfully taking credit, now there’s a thing! I wasn’t suggesting a negative in the buildings’ continued use but rather recognised their continued use and appreciation speaking to their quality. Imposing spurious EPC bandings for totally spurious reasons is just about state control and the deprivation of the broad middle class, Marx knew all about that.

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 03/10/2025 – 17:10
I suspect that imposing spurious EPC bandings for totally spurious reasons is actually about politicians trying to further their careers, nothing at all to do with climate change, and of no real benefit to tenants.

I suspect that George Osborne’s policy of stopping small, non-incorporated landlords from being able to offset their finance costs was also to do with furthering politicians’ political careers, and not really anything that would benefit tenants because it would only result in rents going up and tenants being progressively forced into the arms of incorporated landlords. But it would also have had the effect of deprivation of the ‘middle class’…including plumbers and electricians, all of whom are buy-to-let landlords.

If you were looking for a bit of state-control-freakery then I think the best place to look would be the proposal to make the self-employed and landlords earning £20K PA or over to be obliged to make submissions to Making Tax Digital.

https://www.property118.com/landlords-making-tax-digital-exemption/

There will come a point; soon I think, where landlords will refuse to, or simply can’t comply, and even more will exit the PRS.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 03/10/2025 – 17:23
Correct, fortunately I got exemption from MTD VAT that automatically gave MTD ITSA exemption.

Correct, fortunately I got exemption from MTD VAT that automatically gave MTD ITSA exemption too.

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 03/10/2025 – 18:44
I need to do this. MTD is going to be my worst nightmare

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 03/10/2025 – 18:44
How do you get exemption from MTD VAT that also gives you exemption from MTD ITSA?