Government backs EPC C targets despite landlord cost concerns

Most D grade freehold properties can be upgraded to C with little disruption by adding solar panels, and the rent can reasonably be increased to reflect tenant savings, so could be cost neutral with the right finance. Hopefully by 2030 the cost will have come down further to make it a good option. The only problem would be if the roof needed additional strengthening or local policies disallowed them. They can also be installed away from the house if space permits.

I can see landlords who have older, cheaper lower rental value properties not being willing to spend a significant proportion of the property’s value upgrading. This money will not be recovered in the event of a sale. Most tenants would baulk at the prospect of paying a couple of hundred extra a month to cover upgrade costs in order to save a couple of hundred a year on bills. I wonder if a tenant refusing to have the work done will be sufficient to gain exemption for the landlord. If so, there are going to be a whole lot of exemptions or if not, a whole lot of cheaper properties for sale. Good news for first time buyers, bad news for any tenant that can’t afford full market rent on another rented property.

As an assessor, I think most of us agree with the direction of travel—improving energy efficiency is long overdue, and it genuinely benefits tenants in terms of comfort and running costs.
That said, the challenge is in the delivery. The scale of work required is huge, and for a lot of older or harder-to-treat properties, reaching a true EPC C isn’t always straightforward or proportionate in terms of cost.
The revised £10k cap and extended 2030 deadline are steps in the right direction, but there still seems to be a gap between policy ambition and what’s practically achievable on the ground.
From what I’m seeing, the key issues will be:
clearer and more consistent EPC methodology (especially with upcoming changes)
realistic expectations for older housing stock
and meaningful support or funding to help bridge the gap
Without that, there’s a risk of unintended consequences, particularly around rental supply.

Let’s not worry about the 17% social homes EPC because the councils can’t afford it. Let’s not worry about the EPC of the 64% of private homes because average home owners can’t afford it, and might vote against the government. Let’s just focus on the 19% of the PRS and eventually hope for EPCs of ‘A’ because landlords are rich and deserve a kicking..

Reply to the comment left by Jack Jennings at 18/03/2026 – 15:01
and of the 19% how many will qualify for an exemption further reducing the percentage where any of this will make a blinding bit of difference to the overall NZ madness….

This all still depends on1. Liebour still being in by 2030….THAT in itself is no where near a certainty! 2. The same amount of properties staying in the PRS. If this number drops, so does the percentage of homes it applies to.

I will worry about all this in 2029. If a tenant decides to move out before then (highly unlikely post RRA as there will be even less lets available in general) then I may consider some works if they can be paid for by increased rent going forward.

At the end of the day, an EPC rating is irrelevant if the cost of gas/electricity is unaffordable. It simply just wont be switched on no matter if an EPC says D or B. Better off burning the EPC document to keep warm!

Other problems are inevitable too if a home is better insulated – tenants are less likely to actually ventilate properly to let fresh air in (or as they see it let warm air out). This leads to a whole host of other consequences….

Reply to the comment left by Dominic Bowkett at 18/03/2026 – 14:20
As an Assessor, can you please point me in the direction of which energy saving actions generate the highest increase in EPC rating. It seems to be a black art right now, and what I am looking for is a data driven explanation of how the EPC rating is arrived at, presumably some sort of point scoring system, but what scores the most points? Some of my properties are 1900’s terraced houses with solid brick walls, so I am looking for a cost effectiveness matrix to decide what can be done to meet level C. Thanks

Improved EPC rating won’t save my tenants money on bills as they are students and bills are included.
I’d probably have to spend £30k to save a couple of hundred quid a year on a Victorian mid terrace…not happening.
How long until the next general election?! Fingers crossed…

Reply to the comment left by Dominic Bowkett at 18/03/2026 – 14:20
Speak for yourself I’m most certainly don’t agree with the travel direction EPC is going I’m sick and tired of EPC assessors coming up with different ratings some landlords who are paying shall we say the right amount are getting the rating that they need I know that to be a fact, going to be caught out if they are audited, I spent thousands following government advice to bring my properties up to c now I’m being told the goal poster being changed and that it’s likely when I renew in a year and a half time I will need to put triple glazing in and I’m hearing talk from the assessor of it depends which way the sun is how big your windows are etc I’m sick to the back teeth of it, I have large HMO properties and triple glazing a large HMO will cost me tens of thousands of pounds so I’ll be another one of the landlords that sells up and puts 100tenants on notice

Reply to the comment left by Peter Merrick at 18/03/2026 – 12:48
Every house I have had a survey on has come back as unsuitable. Of course none of this apply to the supported living sector which is what is ruining our citys

Reply to the comment left by Peter Merrick at 18/03/2026 – 12:48
so adding solar panels/associated works cost £8k, but saves the tenant £30 a month. You then propose to charge £30 a month more in rent to make the it ‘cost neutral’?

????

First off you actually check how much energy the tenant is using in reality. The current EPC will give a average consumption for the property, yet I almost guarantee that no tenant consumes that much. The cost of living over the last couple of years has meant cutting back = NOT turning the heating on at all, so that ‘average’ is not being met.

Then explain to the tenant how a £30 rent increase is justified (to save them on energy bills) when they don’t even already consume the level the assessment is based on.

You still think the tenant is going to be in favour? Don’t forget the RRA allows them to challenge a rent increase too….

You are better off getting them to sign to say they don’t want the work and registering an exemption. Leave rent increases instead to reflect market rate – which will very soon include all costs associated with database and ombudsman registration as part of the RRA (and possibly SL localised fees). These are obvious increases that can be passed on and which the rent tribunals will not be able to argue with.