Government’s EPC targets for landlords are ‘unrealistic’ – NRLA
10 months ago | 18 comments
Tenant group claims landlords can easily afford EPC upgrades
12:01 AM, 13th June 2025, 10 months ago
82
Categories:
Generation Rent claims the majority of landlords CAN afford energy-efficiency upgrades because they are mortgage-free.
Despite the tenant group’s claim, as previously reported on Property118, energy-efficiency upgrades are hugely expensive and cost thousands of pounds, which are often then passed down onto tenants.
The tenant group welcomes the government’s commitment to improving energy-efficiency standards in the private rented sector and the announcement of the £13.2 billion funding for the Warm Homes Plan, which aims to support energy efficiency upgrades to homes.
Majority of landlords are mortgage-free, meaning they can easily afford the investment
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has proposed that all private rented properties must meet EPC C targets by 2030, and by 2028 for new tenancies.
In a government consultation on the proposed EPC targets, it was suggested that the maximum required investment for private rented properties to meet minimum energy efficiency standards be raised to £15,000 before landlords can register for an exemption.
However, an industry body warns that this cost cap would push landlords to leave the market.
Despite this, Generation Rent claim landlords can afford the investment.
Dan Wilson, deputy chief executive of Generation Rent, said on X, formerly Twitter: “Everyone needs a good quality, affordable home. It’s the foundation of our lives. But millions of renters are living in cold homes with shocking levels of mould and damp, while they’re most likely to experience fuel poverty. These issues ripple across lives, hugely impacting renters’ mental and physical health.
“Over half of private rented homes in England fall below EPC C, and few landlords will make improvements if they don’t have to. Our analysis shows the majority of landlords are mortgage-free, meaning they can easily afford the investment needed.”
Lower bills won’t be cancelled out by higher rents
Mr Wilson adds: “It’s right the government is intervening to lift renters out of fuel poverty and reduce carbon emissions. The can has already been kicked down the road, which has been bad for renters and the environment.
“To speed things along, grants are available for landlords to make improvements, but tenants need assurance that lower bills won’t just be cancelled out by higher rents – so we need limits on how much landlords can raise the rent. This simple solution would mean renters are able to enjoy warmer homes and lower bills.”
Despite Mr Miliband’s assurances that EPC upgrades will not lead to higher rents, a government minister previously admitted that landlords can raise rents to cover the cost.
Tags:
energy efficiency funding, energy efficiency upgrades, EPC C targets, generation rent, landlord rent increases, mortgage-free landlords, Private Rented Sector, Warm Homes Plan
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
or
Related Articles
iHowz calls on government for clearer guidance as biggest EPC changes in decades come into force
10 months ago | 10 comments
Government to train thousands of retrofit workers but EPC C targets may be ‘impossible’
11 months ago | 7 comments
Member Since July 2024 - Comments: 6
10:13 AM, 5th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Hi,
So I decided to do the EPC course when Sunak was in charge in order to get full and proper information about the cost of upgrading from Ds and Es to Cs – and find out what the most financially efficient way to raise the gradings were.
The properties are Victorian/Edwardian solid wall terraces, or end of terraces.
I was just pulling down the ceiling in the loft conversion of the last one to have work done when I heard Sunak announcing on the radio they were cancelling the requirement. It made it hard to finish pulling down the rest of the ceiling I can tell you!
Anyway – if you actually look at how the system works, a C grade can be achieved with relatively little work. I spent about £7000 upgrading (including the course @ £1500) the four properties.
One of these properties was (the coldest one!) was surprisingly already a C. This was because of proper investigation into various aspects into build dates and researching council plans etc. I even spoke to the previous owner and they provided plans for the extension. A normal EPC assessor would never do this research as there isn’t enough money in it. The previous assessor had incorrectly classified it as a D due to lack of research – for which I don’t blame him I’d like to add. I had to do a couple of days work to find the correct data to get the correct grading.
Anyhow, they are now done for ten years and I shall reassess things at the end of that period.
I would say that none of the upgrades have made the slightest bit of difference in the bills. On one of them because the tenant has a cat and leaves the window open all winter anyway because she refuses to have a cat flap! Not my monkeys, not my circus…..
Until Sunak’s announcement my intention was to start a little business helping other landlords raise their EPC grades to C in the most cost efficient manner. I’d done a few up to that point but obviously demand rather dried up after Sunak’s announcement……!
I’ve let my accreditation lapse now but the qualification still stands so I will have to do another little course to reaccredit – I will see what happens in the future.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 1999
10:33 AM, 7th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Fred Flintstone at 05/07/2025 – 10:13So bottom line (unless I’ve misunderstood is):
– in order to beat the system (because normal EPC assessors don’t understand it) you spent £1,500 on training yourself
– you spent £7,000 upgrading from EPC D to EPC
Doing the ‘upgrade’ made no difference to the heating bills.
I presume that doing the upgrade also made no difference to the amount of non-renewable energy that the properties used. Is that correct?