Landlords are bracing for pricier energy performance certificate (EPC) checks and stricter rules under Ed Miliband’s Net Zero drive, with fears that tougher standards could make thousands of homes impossible to rent. The Telegraph has the details:
Under reforms, energy assessors will be expected to use a new data collection system, raising the price of certificates to up to £250 each.
The more stringent criteria could also mean that properties could drop an EPC band, experts said, making them impossible to let under rules set out by Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary.
Under the new methodology, assessors will be required to inspect the size, frame type and glazing of every window in the house more thoroughly, as well as recording any extractor fans and blocked chimneys.
Chris Norris, of the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) property body, warned that the price of an EPC certificate, which typically costs between £50 and £120, could rise by £20 this summer as a result of the changes. …
However, Sean Horton, of mortgage adviser Respect Mortgages, said the more intensive assessments could increase the price of certificates “to £150-£250 easily”.
He added: “The window measurements alone are crackers. Instead of just noting ‘typical double glazing’, assessors now need to measure each window individually, record orientations, frame types, glazing gaps, ages, draught proofing – the lot.
“That’s going to make each assessment much longer, with the cost passed on to the landlord.”
From 2030, all rental homes must have an EPC score of at least C, while landlords accepting new tenants will be expected to achieve the required standard by 2028. …
Labour is due to replace the beleaguered EPC system entirely with the much-anticipated Home Energy Model, following years of consultation.
Among other changes, the reforms are expected to favour homes with the “capacity to integrate with smart technology”, which some fear will penalise homeowners who refuse a smart meter. …
Kundan Bhaduri, of the Kushman Group real estate firm, said: “For portfolio landlords, this is death by a thousand clipboard checks.
“Costs will rise sharply, and worse still, homes that previously scraped a C rating could now drop to a D, dragging us into yet another regulatory penalty zone. And this is just the warm-up act before the even more chaotic Home Energy Model arrives.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It does rather fit with male proclivities. Adventure, problem solving, overcoming one’s fears and limitation, bloodlust. Although if you can give a woman a taste for blood at a young age you can get her fired up for life. Hunting is seen as a bad thing in England in my experience by the middle class. Perhaps they think of foxhunting alone or perhaps their pussy-ass attitude pervades the whole of their thinking. Working class people have no problem hunting and killing animals in my experience.
Well I’m glad that’s been sorted out at last.
Is ‘Man the Hunter’ a Myth?
I am fairly confident that the answer to this question will be confirmed within the next generation.
Bear Grylls Idland series tells you all you need to know. Women are utterly crap at looking after themselves. Total societal collapse would occur if women take charge. Oh, wait…….
Incel or cuck?🤔 Definitely a toss-up between the two…😂
claims that foraging societies lack or have weak gendered divisions of labor are contradicted by empirical evidence.
Isn’t the concept of empirical evidence an invention of the white patriarchy? And doesn’t that mean that, from the point of view of some feminists, it couldn’t possibly exist in fact?
The reality is plain, and well researched:
‘Among modern foraging societies, men hunt more than women, who mostly target relatively low-quality, reliable resources (i.e., plants and shellfish). This difference has long been assumed to reflect human female reproductive constraints, particularly caring for and provisioning mates and offspring. Long-term studies of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) enable tests of hypotheses about the possible origins of human sex differences in hunting, prior to pair-bonding and regular provisioning. We studied two eastern chimpanzee communities (Kasekela, Mitumba) in Gombe, Tanzania and one (Kanyawara) in Kibale, Uganda. Relative to males, females had low hunting rates in all three communities, even where they encountered red colobus monkeys (the primary prey of chimpanzees) as often as males did. There was no evidence that clinging offspring hampered female hunting. Instead, consistent with the hypothesis that females should be more risk-averse than males, females at all three sites specialized in low cost prey (terrestrial/sedentary prey at Gombe; black and white colobus monkeys at Kanyawara). Female dominance rank was positively correlated with red colobus hunting probability only at Kasekela, suggesting that those in good physical condition were less sensitive to the costs of possible failure. Finally, the potential for carcass appropriation by males deterred females at Kasekela (but not Kanyawara or Mitumba) from hunting in parties containing many adult males. Although chimpanzees are not direct analogs of the last common ancestor (LCA) of Pan and Homo, these results suggest that before the emergence of social obligations regarding sharing and provisioning, constraints on hunting by LCA females did not necessarily stem from maternal care. Instead, they suggest that a risk-averse foraging strategy and the potential for losing prey to males limited female predation on vertebrates. Sex differences in hunting behavior would likely have preceded the evolution of the sexual division of labor among modern humans.’
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5570454/
Nah!
Weve always used Tesco.
It is obvious really just look at a group of primary school boys and primary school girls. The same goes for teenage years. Their pursuits are so different that each one almost requires a separate emotional language. And this is despite the attempts of parents to iron out the differences. But it is difficult when you have a predatory class that seeks to neutralize the male and the female in order to reduce the potency of any resistance. The less perspicacious are left in a state of confusion and neurosis.
The only problem? Andersen and colleagues’ study appears to be flawed.
No S**t.
I don’t need to review their work to know that, and I also don’t need a degree to know what a women is.
My empirical experience is that I like shooting and hard physical exercise and my wife PBUH likes picking olives, wild strawberries collecting eggs and what have you.
It’s a no-brainer.
Baked into the DNA.
We have rather restricted access to weapons. Just look at how weak British airguns are. I suppose you could argue that it improves accuracy. You can’t even buy a low calibre rifle in this country without a firearms certificate. The twentieth century was a slow motion removal of gun rights. You aren’t even allowed to carry a full length sword in England I think the limit is a 10 cm not locking blade. How are you supposed to slice someone up with that you are more likely to chop your fingers off in the process. We need to allow men to carry any reasonable weapon. I don’t care about spree killings and mass shootings that is a small price to pay.
My BSA Supersport 177 is powerful. And you can’t go wrong with a good Axe!
Yes, but what is a woman? Just asking for my mate Keir.
The move towards the androgyne has been documented to be a sign of the falling of a civilisation,Tits, dick, scrotum you name it.It always happens. The notion of the most certain things being turned on their head. You can’t engage with it you can’t stop the decline. And it roots in deeper and deeper. Yesterday you looked in your trousers and had a penis. Today you barely have a clit. What does one do in such a situation? How does one endure?
Nowadays “objective” science is so ideologically driven that if the woke left demanded that the moon is made of cheese immediately there would be publications popping up in all the scientific magazines proving that this is indeed the case.
After all it wouldn’t be any more absurd than saying that a person with a penis can be a woman and there are 72 genders.
Science these days is not a method of enquiry to determine objective truth, it is mostly just a support vehicle for political power.
(By the way, having seen my wife pregnant and looking after our babies, my personal experience is that motherhood is not conducive to activities such as hunting.)
Elaine Morgan’s “The Descent of Woman” puts forward an aquatic ape theory which is very interesting: that we spent a lot of time at the water’s edge and that fishing and eating shell fish enabled our brains to grow and our bodies to store fat under the skin and to lose a lot of body hair, among other theories. Well worth a read. She wrote it in response to Bronowski’s the Ascent of Man because she felt that he had left out half the human race….