What’s the definition of a building? Under Part L of Building Regulations, it needs to have a roof and walls and use energy to condition the indoor climate.

I was reminded of this when we were called in to survey some retail units set in the arches under a railway line, which had opening hatches rather than windows. Another Energy Assessor had incorrectly defined these units as buildings and produced 334 EPCs at a cost of more than £50,000. The client – frustrated by their subsequent lack of engagement – asked us to survey 33 of the units. We found 18 weren’t within scope of the Regulations and saved the client £3,000 in the process.

The previous Energy Assessor should have understood this definition, or perhaps they did and simply went ahead with the assessment anyway. When some are instructed to produce an EPC, they want to charge for one regardless of whether the building is in scope. Maybe they’re ignorant or unconsciously incompetent; either way, we now have the task of reviewing those 300+ units, while the client must deal with the potential problem of removing them from the register or improving those below a band E – an unenviable task. The client has already spent thousands of pounds, and challenging the findings would mean starting an appeal process. It just needs one landlord to create a legal case on which to base future decisions and provide clarity – but who wants to be that person?

Let’s face it, EPCs haven’t had any value for the last decade and the errors in methodology bring into question the robustness of the whole process. It’s common knowledge amongst Non-Domestic Energy Assessors that you get a worse EPC score by putting LED lights into a building that is predominantly heated by fossil fuels because the methodology overestimates the heat from inefficient lighting, thereby reducing the load on a heating system – LEDs don’t produce heat. There’s also the example of a building without fixed heating which is expected to be heated because of the nature of the activity – whereby an employer needs to provide staff with suitable facilities such as handwashing – then an EPC is required. This government guidance aims to prevent landlords from interpreting the law by removing the heating to take the building out of scope, so they won’t need an EPC. However, it can all be confusing and open to interpretation. The big question is, what should we rely on? The law (which merely states if a building uses energy to condition the indoor climate, then it is within scope) or the guidance (which seeks to provide some clarity on the matter of no fixed heating/cooling but that if there is an expectation of conditioning then it falls within scope of needing an EPC and the Assessor should run their calculations using the most energy intensive heating system). In the absence of any case law there will undoubtedly be different interpretations and approaches to when an EPC is required.

At least the government has now acknowledged that EPC methodology needs to change and its new consultation – with proposals for using different metrics on domestic EPCs to provide a more complete representation of building energy performance, including energy cost, an estimate of the carbon emissions, energy use, fabric performance, details about the heating system and a building’s smart readiness – look promising. Along with its proposals to address training in the sector (more on this in my next blog), Energy Assessors will probably have to upskill. The government is also reviewing the Non-Domestic Energy Assessor market which should result in implementing new regulation around the next stage of MEES, potentially triggering further upskilling.

While we can talk about methodology, ultimately the reality of a client’s experience is down to the quality of Energy Assessor, and that person’s willingness to collaborate with local authorities, tradespeople and tenants to produce an honest and accurate EPC – and then to provide their client with useful advice. In a climate of rising costs, shifting legislation and funding challenges, if a tenant wants to make changes to a building, they’ll increasingly have to consider the impacts on the EPC, which is where a good Energy Assessor is invaluable. Those who can interpret software and tailor it to feasible strategies will be hugely valued – even more so when we eventually get a more stringent iteration of EPCs.

Our clients accept Murton & Co’s advice – even if they don’t like it – because they know we have integrity. We wouldn’t suggest fitting an air conditioning unit that’s totally impractical, just to appease a client or reach an EPC band. But while new Energy Assessors need to be instilled with this moral compass to fully appreciate their liability, that’s simply not possible on a four-day NDEA course. We might pick up clients frustrated by the poor service received from other Assessors almost every week which is great for our business, but ultimately depressing that I work in a profession where many of my peers are ‘unconsciously incompetent’. Unless the government addresses this failing, I fear we’ll all end up being tarred by the same brush, which would be the undoing of the Energy Assessor market.