Publication - Consultation paper

Improving energy efficiency in owner occupied homes: consultation

Published: 19 Dec 2019
Directorate:
Housing and Social Justice Directorate
Part of:
Energy, Housing
ISBN:
9781839603990

This consultation seeks views on proposals to set a standard for energy efficiency and to make it mandatory for homeowners from 2024 onwards.

57 page PDF

679.8 kB

57 page PDF

679.8 kB

Contents
Improving energy efficiency in owner occupied homes: consultation
Summary of consultation questions

57 page PDF

679.8 kB

Summary of consultation questions

1. Do you agree or disagree that there should be a legally-binding energy efficiency standard for owner-occupied housing?

2. Do you agree or disagree that EPC Energy Efficiency Rating band C is the appropriate standard to use? Please explain.

3. What are your views on the "fabric first" approach as described section 1.1?

4. In your view, how can we ensure that when EPCs are used to determine compliance with the standard they are robust and not easily open to misuse?

5. Do you think the standard should be fixed, or should it be subject to periodic review and change over time? Please explain your view.

6. Do you agree or disagree that 2024 is the right start date for the mandatory standard to start operating? Please give your reasons, whether you agree or disagree.

7. Do you agree or disagree with point of sale as an appropriate trigger point for a property to meet the legally-binding standard?

8. Do you agree or disagree that responsibility for meeting the standard should pass to the buyer if the standard is not already met at point of sale, as described above? Please explain your views and give any evidence you have, whether you agree or disagree.

9. What, if any, unintended consequences do you think could happen as a result of these proposals? For example, any positive or negative effects on the house sales market.

10. Do you agree or disagree with point of major renovation as an appropriate trigger point for a property to meet the legally-binding standard?

11. What is your view on how "major renovation" should be defined? Should the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive definition, as described in Annex B, be used? Please explain.

12. How could a requirement to meet the energy efficiency standard at point of major renovation be checked and enforced? Who should be responsible for this?

13. What do you think would be a fair and appropriate method to ensure compliance, if the legally-binding standard is not met? What type of penalty system would be appropriate? Please explain.

14. Should a penalty for failing to comply with the standard be one-off or recurring?

15. At what level, approximately, should any penalty be set?

16. Are there any particular groups of people who could be adversely affected, more than others, by enforcement processes and charges?

17. Which body or bodies should check if the standard has been complied with at the trigger point, and should be responsible for levying any penalty?

18. Considering the information above and in Annex D, what are your views on the best way to approach cost effectiveness, taking into account the trade-offs between how easy to understand and how sophisticated different definitions are, and how the different definitions might affect the number of homes that actually achieve the EPC C standard?

19. Other than technical feasibility and cost effectiveness, are there any other reasons why a homeowner may not be able to bring their property up to EPC C at point of sale or renovation, and would need to be given an exemption or abeyance? (For example, difficulties of getting permission from other owners for common parts of buildings.) Please explain.

20. Do you agree or disagree that, even if a property can't fully meet the standard, it should be required to get as close as possible to it?

21. Do you agree or disagree that any exemptions or abeyances from the standard should be time-limited?

22. Which body or bodies should take decisions about granting abeyances? Should this be done at a local level or centrally at a national level?

23. The SLWG on Assessment propose that any new assessment regime should exist on two levels, comprising both a mandatory asset-based assessment and an optional occupancy-based assessment. What are your views on this approach? Do you agree that an occupancy assessment should be optional? Are there specific inputs that should be included in both? Please explain your answer.

24. The SLWG on Assessment propose that the output of the assessment should be a report with tailored recommendations that set a clear pathway to both regulatory compliance (i.e. EPC band C) and zero carbon. There are conflicts between meeting the EPC rating and zero carbon. What are your views on how this can be handled/mitigated? Please explain your answer.

25. The new assessment proposals from the SLWG on Assessment include more of an advisory role for the assessor. What are your views on the additional skills and training required to deliver this role? Are existing Domestic Energy Assessors best placed to provide the tailored recommendations? What risks and conflicts do you foresee and how would you propose to mitigate them? Please explain your answer.

26. The SLWG on Assessment propose that the tailored recommendations to improve energy efficiency and achieve zero carbon should consider the legal designation of buildings, obvious defects or condition issues, and local costings. Do you foresee any liability issues in this approach and if so, what suggestions do you have to mitigate them? Do you believe the inclusion of local costings to be practical and what are your thoughts on what level should be considered 'local'? Should the local cost of energy also be considered? Please explain your answer.

27. The SLWG on Assessment propose that the assessment should provide a theoretical indication of whether recommendations are technically feasible. Please provide your views on who should determine actual technical feasibility? Should this be a qualified installer or someone else? Please explain your answer.

28. In your view, what are the most important considerations for homeowners who are required to meet the legally-binding standard, in relation to skills, supply chain, consumer protection and quality assurance?

29. What are your views on how the Quality, Skills and Consumer Protection SLWG recommendations specifically have an impact on the owner occupied sector? Please explain.

30. In your opinion, is this the right range of Scottish Government financial support schemes? Are there any gaps, regarding either types of financial product or groups of people who may be excluded from being able to access products? Please explain your views.

31. Do you agree or disagree that grant funding from the public purse should be focused on households who are vulnerable or in fuel poverty? Please explain if you disagree.

32. In your opinion, what sources of non-government, private sector support are people most likely to want to access? (eg from banks, building societies, credit unions, mortgage providers)


Contact

Email: leeanne.mullan@gov.scot