Government consultation to increase minimum EPC rating to band C for PRS

I've not read all comments, but seen some have said same as me-I've got all combi boilers, composite doors, double glazing, insulation & some of mine are D's, I think even E's.

What is this Govt doing imposing retrospective rules. Tenants are paying enough as it is. Coupled with supply demand, those remaining will have to be & could choose to charge an arm & leg in rent.

They say:
Increase the quality, value and desirability of landlords’ assets;
Aah right, Let's all go out & buy some Rolls Royces too then, they'd be quality & a nice asset to have.

And why to the PRS? Not Councils? Private home owners? I'm sure they'd like a quality asset.

I've just done that survey, Gees as some said has said on here in the past, it's getting worse for Landlords, & consequently long standing Benefit vulnerable tenants. I thought the Govt would have learn't its lesson by 2021 & thought Wow we got no houses left for tenants, let's give Landlords some slack.
But judging by questions on that survey, they want to do more enforcement on Landlords.
I put my bit in below should anyone wish to repeat. It may not be relevant in some areas, but in Nottingham my words are 100% true.

Every policy the Councils & Govt brings to what they think will help tenants, ends up hurting them, they han't got a clue.

U let Landlords do what they want as long as it's legal, stop all the Govt and Council and Universal Credit calamities & Licensing attacks etc. Loads more people would buy to rent out. More choice for tenants, they'd say Not having your house not good enough and they go down the road to get the next one.
But now there is no choice for them, yet we get the blame. So Govt attacks us again, we charge the tenant to pay for these attacks, tenant goes to Govt again moaning, Govt attacks us again and the circle carries on.

For example, u have a Newsreader on 150k salary. He has 100k in the bank doing 1% interest & he's miffed. You tell him he can put this 100k in a house, leave it with a letting agent, as long as he does what the agent asks in terms of making sure he pays for the boiler certificate, electrical certificate etc., make the house legal, safe, not dangerous. That agent will then get 6% return for that house on your money, maybe 4% after all your repairs, fees etc.
You han't got to go on any silly accreditation courses to prove u can add 2+2, u han't got fill Licensing forms in for hours upon end, the Letting Agent is already checked out as being responsible, u won't go to prison if tenant takes batteries out smoke alarm, as we don't pass all the buck onto the Landlord now where the tenant has clearly been irresponsible etc. etc.
The Newsreader & all those with some cash in the bank & also those with deposits for a mortgage will think Well, much better return for me money PLUS I alleviate the homeless problem if I have a conscience too, it's a win win.

And that is how u bring rents down. Us Landlords that's still here, know tenants in most areas are queuing for houses, they can't get anywhere, Rogue Landlords can leave house dangerous, cause tenant has no choice.
Give tenant a choice, next Landlord has to improve his house or it will be empty & he will also have to be competitive.

Reply to the comment left by MoodyMolls at 03/10/2020 - 08:03
That's also one of my concerns. If you have solid walls and lime mortar the walls need to breathe. How's that going to happen if you've stuck plasterboard backed with synthetic insulation and foil over it? If you do it, surely the battens holding the plasterboard will just rot out? I know that cavity wall insulation has become popular in recent years but cavities also have a purpose and they may be ventilated. How is the air going to move if you fill them full of polystyrene beads? In some properties surely you'd be better off adding a porch, upgrading the double glazing and insulating the roof.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 05/10/2020 - 10:10
There is firms now setting up to sue the firms who did the cavity wall insulation, as later problems found mould, condensation, not allowing to breathe etc.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 05/10/2020 - 11:15
That's been a concern of mine for years. I'm not wild about pumping polystyrene into my house anyway because of the fire risk and my suspicion has always been that over time the beads will just compact down into a plastic gloup at the base of the wall and obstruct the ventilation. And you can't get them out again can you?

In my own house I have ventilators in my cavity walls that are there both to ventilate the walls and allow air to the fireplace. In my buy to let property the ventilators are also ventilating the floors as well as the walls and stopping the joists from rotting. I've never been convinced clogging them up is a good thing.

Beyond being a landlord there's a green homes grant at the moment for owner occupiers. *But* you can only access it if you are also insulating the walls and the roof. So if you have loft insulation (most do) you can't access the funding. The only thing you can do is put cavity wall insulation in or dry line the walls if you already have cavity wall insulation and for many of us that would do more harm that good in my view.

Problem is, if the best thing for your property isn't to fill the cavity or dry-line the walls because they need to ventilate then you can't access anything. Your best option could be to leave the walls alone, add a porch or thermally efficient doors, or possibly put in an alternative heating system....maybe PV tiles if not solar tiles, ground source heat pump, air source heat pump, micro chp unit if you have a gas supply. Nothing wrong with burning dry wood in a rural area. All these things would help and some would be a good option for traditional properties with solid walls.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 05/10/2020 - 11:15
Yes I had this problem in one of my own properties .

Reply to the comment left by Jan Martin at 05/10/2020 - 12:36Sometimes these changes are well-intentioned but they have unintended consequences.
If you live in a rural area you often find tenanted properties on large estates, or farms who have a ready supply of firewood which you can process. It's surprising how much firewood you'll get out of the hedges of even a smallholding. Particulates are a problem in urban areas but not in rural areas; even in semi-rural areas where housing density is low burning dry wood isn't a problem if your chimney is high enough.
If you've got a property, or rented properties, with solid walls that are heated by firewood then improving the insulation in the roof, doors, windows might make sense, installing some kind of biomass boiler might make sense; but you don't want some council jobsworth telling you that you can't light the fire because you are not burning "X".
I have a friend who used to run a recycling centre....basically a large plot of waste land away from houses. I used to go down to pick up firewood because they don't have time to process it. I also occasionally burn pallet wood.
What usually happens to waste wood (including pallet wood) is that it gets piled into a skip, taken to a bit of waste ground and somebody piles it up and sets fire to it. The CO2 goes back into the atmosphere without heating anything and the particulates do too; it's just done away from houses so people can't see it.
Even in an urban area it might not make sense to insulate the walls if you were in a conservation area: Could do a whole heap of damage. The bits of your house that could improve things are probably your roof (via PV tiles) your garden (ground source heat pump), any side-areas that could accommodate an air-source heat pump. But you can't access any funding for any of these things unless you are prepared to put cavity wall insulation in or dry-line the walls. For your own property that might not be where the main source of heat loss is anyway.

Reply to the comment left by Windsor Woman at 02/10/2020 - 09:35
Having previously enquired about both internal/ external insulation myself, I was advised that all finishing works/ decorating of rooms etc. would be completed by the contractors installing the insulation..

Reply to the comment left by John at 01/10/2020 - 23:01
Probably won't get permission for external insulation in a conservation area - but you MUST apply (every few years) so that you can register an exemption!

I'm very much against external insualtion, though, for 3 reasons:
(1) Unless done with great care, it will look shabby in no time.
(2) Maintenance and/or the effect of weather, will both reduce the effect of the insulation.
(3) Has anybody heard about Grenfell?

Reply to the comment left by Ron H-W at 07/10/2020 - 10:24I think it will be bad news for a lot of landlords if it goes ahead in its current form; and I think that's a shame because I'm sympathetic to developments that reduce our CO2 emissions and reduce the impact of our housing.
The problem is that for a lot of landlords that have houses with solid walls it's not going to be worth insulating the walls and it's not going to be the best thing for the property. So they will sell to owner occupiers who aren't obliged to do any of this stuff. The owner occupiers won't be able to access funding to make any other changes such as put in alternative heating sources to those driven by gas, oil, or mains electricity and probably won't be able to justify the cost because you can only access the funding under the green energy initiative if you are putting the insulation in. So the net effect will be fewer rental properties available and no net benefit in terms of reducing CO2 emissions.
Really what needs to happen is that you should be able to put a plan in place to improve every property whether you are a PRS landlord or an owner occupier, or it will make no difference and could even be negative. And the social housing sector should definitely not be left off the hook; if somebody is planning to spend billions on the social housing sector then the social sector should be accountable for that spend and they should be obliged to meet measurable standards. The fact that they are proposing to impose these standards on the PRS and not the social housing sector is shameful.