Landlords face £21 billion bill to meet new EPC standards

Landlords face £21 billion bill to meet new EPC standards

0:02 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago 14

Text Size

Landlords in the UK are facing a substantial financial burden to comply with the government’s proposed energy efficiency standards.

According to research by Zero Deposit, the tenancy deposit alternative, it will cost the nation’s landlords £21.455 billion to bring their properties up to the required EPC C rating by 2030.

Net Zero minister Ed Miliband has announced plans to consult on raising the minimum energy efficiency standard for both private and social rented homes.

This means landlords will need to ensure their properties have a minimum EPC rating of C, compared to the current requirement of E.

Bill focussed on the welfare of tenants

The firm’s managing director, Sam Reynolds, said: “Our new Labour Government has been quick out of the blocks with respect to rental market reform, with the Renters’ Rights Bill widely focussed on the welfare of tenants, with little consideration for those who provide the rental accommodation we so sorely need.

“The latest move to make an EPC rating of C mandatory by 2030 is much the same in this respect.

“Whilst it is, of course, a positive to improve the energy efficiency of rental homes within the PRS, the mandatory obligation to make these improvements is likely to cost private landlords billions.”

He adds: “Yet another cost incurred due to legislative changes will likely leave a bad taste in the mouths of the nation’s landlords and it could well be the final straw for many who are sat on the fence as to their future within the sector.”

Private rented homes fall short

The research by Zero Deposit shows that a significant number of private rented homes currently fall short of the proposed standard.

More than half of all PRS homes have an EPC rating of D or below, with around 12% rated E, F or G.

Yorkshire and the Humber has the highest proportion of homes requiring upgrades, with 74% potentially needing to meet the EPC C standard by 2030.

While London has the lowest proportion of homes rated D or below, landlords in the capital could face the highest costs in bringing their properties up to standard.

Cost of upgrading a rental property

The average cost of upgrading a rental property to a band C EPC rating is estimated to be £8,000.

With millions of homes requiring improvement across England, the total cost to landlords could reach £21.455 billion.

In London, the average cost of improvement is even higher, reaching £9,000 per property.

This means London landlords alone could face a bill of £3.798 billion to meet the new energy efficiency requirements.

Even in the North East, where the cost is lowest, landlords are facing a total of £666.6 million to bring their homes up to an EPC C rating.


Share This Article


Comments

Cider Drinker

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

0:16 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

Whilst I think the number is questionable, Ministers should be in no doubt about who will pay.

It won’t be the landlords. At least, not in full. It must be the people that benefit from the (ahem) improvements. And that is, of course, the tenants.

Let’s hope Housing Benefit is increased to cover the higher rents.

It may already be too late to gain possession via Section 21 but there will be fewer rental properties by the end if the Loonies’ 5 years at the helm of the good ship HMS Asylum..

How long have we got left?

Chris Mills

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

7:24 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

My best earner, a 4 bed semi, is going on the sales market now as the current great tenants are buying their own house, and I wish them well. It's an EPC D rated property despite cavity wall and loft insulation - apparently it's the footprint size of the house along with the warped EPC rating system. Anyhow, I cannot risk placing new tenants in who will perhaps never leave, may decide not to pay their rent and generally smash the place up. I wouldn't be able to prperly choose the tenant under Labour's folly, and i know it's not law yet but im jumping before i'm pushed. Another 9 properties left, waiting for natural vacancies to occur and do the same. Going to use the money to maybe flip some renovations or just enjoy my path into retirement. My children don't want this hassle passed on to them.
I'm convinced that the idiots making PRS policy haven't a clue what consequences to tenants at the bottom of the pile will be.

Beaver

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:16 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

Reply to the comment left by Chris Mills at 01/10/2024 - 07:24
I think that it is a mixture of ignorance, incompetence, hypocrisy, and the triumph of sound-bites over effective policy.

Mark Drakeford in Wales understood when he was making things worse on rent controls and backed off.

The consequences to tenants of moving all properties to minimum will be lack of choice in the rental market and higher rents. Tenants will not benefit in any way.

Paul

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:17 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

Just remember the government does not care about your assets or your ability to mortgage or insurance them. They will gladly encourage you to ruin your properties with unnecessary chemicals.

Northernpleb

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:47 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

Some of the suggested /required so called improvements on EPC certificate are just Daft.
And will never pay for them self .
The reason Labour are doing this is to create a market. they cannot force Homeowners to spend a fortune on EPC targets But Landlords are easy targets.
With regards to us all having an electric car and Boiler in six years well what do you think.

Beaver

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

11:01 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

Reply to the comment left by Northernpleb at 01/10/2024 - 10:47
What I think is that they can't afford to do it and the only way that they could make them affordable for anybody else is to make them tax deductible.

They haven't got the money and despite their bleatings about stuff they inherited from the conservatives they were in opposition arguing for more spend during the last government and are at least as culpable for the present deficit.

Bottom line is that haven't got the money and if they try to impose this nonsense on landlords then tenants will suffer.

Denise G

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

11:09 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

What no-one in power seems to appreciate is that if we sell up our BTL properties they are indeed very likely to appeal to FTB's - which, we are told, is what the Government want ... but in order to free up a property to sell it to a FTB we will need to make another family homeless, as our renters don't want to, or can't afford to, buy.
Can someone cleverer than me enlighten me as to where the gain in terms of reducing homelessness is in that scenario?

moneymanager

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

11:36 AM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

'You will own nothing and you (we) will be happy'

Whether tenant or landlord, we arw all going to be relyng on extra jumpers, just yesterday yet another coal fired generating station permanenty closed, good you might say but Bill Gates, strongly pushing the UN 'Climate Crisis' propaganda is building his own, wind turbine, no, actually his own nuclear power sration saying 'it's important to get the right balance between renewables (expensive, inefficient, reliant on subsidies, land use hungry) and nuclear, if their lips ar moving they are lying to you

Beaver

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

13:22 PM, 1st October 2024, About 2 weeks ago

Reply to the comment left by Denise G at 01/10/2024 - 11:09
If they wanted to make ex. BTL properties affordable to first-time-buyers then they could re-introduce Mortgage Interest Relief at Source or some other equivalent, i.e. by making mortgage interest on your principle-private residence deductible from your earnings up to a certain limit. That could help people buy their ex. council house, as Angela Rayner did, although in reality council house people are already getting 30-50% discount paid by the tax payer so that policy would have to be eliminated. It does seem unjust to restrict that to first-time buyers as older people might have lost their first-time properties, either because of life changes such as divorce or economic policies inflicted by governments that were not their fault.

But as you correctly say, that won't make any difference to tenants because it's a net-loss of property from the rental market if the tenants were living at home before they bought, or neutral if the tenants were living in rented accommodation, or something in between. It doesn't benefit tenants.

It doesn't make any difference to emissions because typical first-time buyers struggle to raise the deposit and they don't have the money for retrofits. They have to opt for gas boilers along with everybody else as it's the cheapest option; unless of course they can still buy coal, or they have a source of logs or reclaimed wood that they can burn in their solid-fuel burner whilst they turn the boiler off.

Demolishing old properties and building new ones has a significant impact on the environment and isn't investment in new build. Tax policy favours new build because VAT isn't chargeable on new build but it is on renovations and retrofits. That's an environmentally-damaging policy that as far as I can see Angela-Ed have not picked up on yet.

But as far as renters go, stopping renters from being able to rent band D, E, or F just restricts supply and drives rents up. It doesn't benefit tenants and for all the reasons above makes no significant difference to climate emissions.

Mike Thomas

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

11:30 AM, 2nd October 2024, About A week ago

Reply to the comment left by Northernpleb at 01/10/2024 - 10:47
I don't think you'll ever find the truth behind Labours policies, but if an aconimidt wants to stimulate the market place, they don't destroy the PRS in the process. Johnson implemented Net Zero without an assessment, and Labour are implementing typical 70s Labour policies without any consideration whatsoever for their effects. Is it their hatred of landlords that is greater than their contempt for those who would normally be their traditional voters. Either way, this and the last government have proved their inability to do the job we ask of them.

1 2

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Automated Assistant Read More