Teething problems for the Green Deal

Certainly there can be no excuses for getting some of the basics wrong, floor area, identification of wall type or heating.

The report author appears to indicate their property as a ‘new’ home to them. This leaves the adviser with a choice to make about the energy information provided. If the author has only occupied the property for less than a year, it is unlikely that the billing information would provide enough data for the adviser to work with. They can then choose to use the default within the system to calculate savings. The adviser should make the client aware of this and should be prompted to ask more detailed information about usage from the client.

Using the ‘default’ could skew the report dependant on the client being in actual fact a ‘high’ consumer or a ‘low’ consumer. If they are a high consumer the default could be actually lower than their ‘actual’ consumption and therefore the savings would be incorrect.

Incorrect property data combine with the ability of the assessor to use provided energy data or ‘default’ data could go someway to explaining the difference’s, there is no excuse for getting the basic property information wrong.
The Green Deal has seen quite a number of ‘new’ entrants to the assessment industry with very limited experience on site, possibly they were the ones that attended if ‘basic’ data was incorrect.

As the reporter acknowledges this is a ‘new’ process and there have certainly been ‘teething problems’ with software but it is anticipated that things are improving rapidly.

My understanding from observing a number of green deal assessments is that the assessor cannot prevent the default settings overriding the details of actual energy use. This means that my predicted savings are well above my actual energy use so if I took out a loan the repayments plus fuel payments would be a lot more than I pay now – so much for the golden rule. I think this is dangerous because many people do not understand the report or what they are told by the assessor and think they are getting something which they are not. So it is a good thing that it is not possible to get loans at present, especially with the high interest rates which we are not warned about. The alternative provision, affordable warmth, is not explained even if it mentioned so people may not realise they could get things done this way. However, at present very few energy efficiency measures are available through this scheme (fewer that with previous schemes) so people with limited income really have no way to improve their homes. I am disappointed because I had thought that making homes more energy efficient was the purpose of the green deal and Eco.

Some interesting comments both from industry participants and users of the Green Deal Assessment service. I am a practicing Domestic Energy Assessor (DEA) since its concept and have done some 5000 EPC assessments across the Domestic Property Spectrum. I am also a GDA (Green Deal Advisor), since October 2012 and a Green Deal Assessor Organisation (GDAO), Sole Trader since May and have conducted, a large number of assessments, mainly for Solid Wall Insulation but based on the Green Deal. That’s my facts and background.

The Which Report is, as you would expect, fairly well balanced and accurate to a point. The variation in EPC scores is as mentioned a concern when based on a standardised system. However I also question the Which Report comment on the British Gas and Vibrant Energy Matters being a fair match to their (Which) experts evaluation when both reports are 9 points or 9% apart. The industry audit standard is evidence must show no more than 5 points(5%) difference for it to pass audit, assuming no major description inaccuracy’s..

User comments are varied as I would expect, only because of the incorrect high expectations created via the initial low hype (I know, a contradiction in terms) at the start of the Green Deal Launch. However my experience with Property Occupiers is in the main a practical and good experience. This however is due to my being a Sole Trader GDAO and so am able to have a meaningful conversation with the Property Owner, before they commit to the Green Deal Assessment and between us, establish if the Green Deal, is right for them at this point in time. I also at the start of any assessment following the required explanations, give the opportunity for the occupier to cancel, if they feel the Green Deal, may after all not be for them, at no cost. I only take payment on completion of the assessment, not before. Unlike the multi GDA/GDAO service, who take the initial call, take the money then get the GDA to make the appointment. The initial call taker having the job of securing the assessment, perhaps under target pressure. This is not a get at Multi GDA/GDAOs but there is a difference.

The DEA /GDA comments are varied and opinionated. I agree with the fact that many GDAs are new to the industry and therefore very inexperienced with the EPC production element and of course as this is the basis the Green Deal Report is initially based on, there is cause for concern. However perhaps the training organisations should take some responsibility there. A 10 day course for someone new to the industry and then given the Green Light to do EPC and GD assessments, without a meaningful probation period is placing to much on the new to industry person to get it right from day 1. Why not create a probation period by attaching the new assessor to a local experienced assessor for a minimum number of EPC assessments. Then at least the chassis of the Green Deal Advice Report, (GDAR) being the EPC would have a greater chance of being correct or at least within the allowed 5% variant.

The GDA who goes on the do the Occupancy Assessment (OA) is inexperienced generally as its a totally new concept, but, in my view no DEA should do a full GDAR without at least complete a minimum number of EPCs only following a probation period. The reason for this is the OA is fairly simple by comparison to the EPC element, but it takes confidence and listening skills to meaningfully sit down and advice the occupier on the full spectrum of the GDAR and recommendations. This requires EPC assessment experience.

In my view, the Green Deal is a good, but fledgling process. Perhaps launched 12 months to early. The main thrust of the EPC/GDAR being the legally required reduction, as a country, in our Carbon Emissions by 2050. So the Green Deal, or its evolvement is here to stay. If a practical view is taken to the process and expected outcome,, before the assessment, fewer would be disappointed. The Green Deal is expensive money but the Golden Rule and Responsibility to pay whilst the Meter Bill Payer only, can make it an affordable alternative to some, rather than higher and higher monthly energy bills. ECO, that is working but no one should expect 100% funding, with regard to Solid Wall Insulation as there are to many variants involved but basically off gas grid, rural properties stand a good chance of perhaps majority funding.

Well done the initiator of the Green Deal, well done all those who have committed too it from the industry, new and old, for the right reasons (being there is a need for it) and well done all those who have taken the first step. The Green Deal will work, eventually, if a practical view is taken by all. What is the alternative…….

March 2015 – just had a GDA which seems to bear no resemblance to my home!! Read epc online after the event and complained to the the council who will contact GDP who arranged it free of charge. (I am an owner-occupier but local council is trying to help out with partial interest-free loans for very hard to heat properties in its area, leaving the householder to make up the shortfall with own funds/another loan plus Green Deal cashback.) Waiting to hear any further developments, but delay will probably mean I will miss out on funding this time round, due to major inaccuracies in epc. I live in a Wimpy no-fines home which leaks heat out of the walls. In no part of the ‘recommendations’ section did the GDA mention solid wall insulation (external) which is what I am looking for, and which neighbours in the same type of houses have found have reduced heat leakage and gas bills! Instead mention was made of photovoltaic technology (I have NO south facing roofs or wall on which this could be mounted) and his estimate of my low- energy light bulbs was 25% when in fact I have 80% or more of these. He had access to all rooms except one bedroom (where I had shut the dog who does not like strangers in the house). I decribed room to him and position of radiator, also mentioned the heating problems despite having gas-fired central heating, and made sure I mentioned the wall construction. He had full access to outside of house, was only there for half hour and said he’d go and sit in his vehicle to do his report (as my dog barked and he thought it would be less tress for both of us I think!) He seemed intelligent and I had no qualms about this, but afterwards I did wonder if he had muddled up my house with someone else’s!! As an OAP with no savings I was hoping to get the interest-free loan from my local council to help – they only use one GDP though, who ‘made the application’ on my behalf. There seem to be so many ways of doing things, so many different assessors with differing levels of competence, I cannot be the only one who feels the whole scheme should be more consistent. As my poor estate is tagged onto a more affluent one for the purposes of voting (electoral ward) I always seem to miss out on any extra help through ECO – a total postcode lottery. Very dissilusioned as feel I could have done a beter job of the assessment with no training!! House came out as a D – no way is it that – more like an F.