BER rating

noseyhole

i have just moved into a nice house , but ive found the attic etc isnt insulated. i knew it had no ber but assumed it was just because of the $ involved in getting one but there is NO insulation at all !! its baltic upstairs . i really dont want to move location and it would great if an inspector from some agency called to inspect the house and forced the LL to insulate it or reduce the rent to cover some of the heating bills. im paying fairly high rent and am shocked . is there any goverment arm that could be contacted or should i risk the wrath of the LL AND CONFRONT HIM?

Paulw

I don't believe that insulation is a legal requirement. It's more common sense and cost effective.

Talk to the landlord and try to work it out. In fairness, you should ask for the BER cert. The cost of insulation is probably about the same price as the cost of the BER cert.

noseyhole

thanks. yeah think i,ll approach him about doing it (and a few other things ) the hse is about 120 sq mtrs or so. how much fiberglass would it take to do it to a decent standard. what depth sould the insulation be ??

Ray Palmer

Personally as a LL I would insulate and have but renting a place and then asking for changes is always prone to issues. BER cost €150 and if the LL isn't going to pay that then walk away. Insulating an attic is really cheap and easy job.

The BER is well known enough now there isn't really any excuse not to get it. Insulation in the attic is the most basic upgrade.

odds_on

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Personally as a LL I would insulate and have but renting a place and then asking for changes is always prone to issues. BER cost €150 and if the LL isn't going to pay that then walk away. Insulating an attic is really cheap and easy job.

The BER is well known enough now there isn't really any excuse not to get it. Insulation in the attic is the most basic upgrade.

It is actually illegal to "offer for sale or rent" any residential property without a current BER cert - which lasts up to 10 years. However, the powers that be have not got their act together to enforce this law - so it remains up to buyers or renters to ask for the BER cert which they rarely do.

sarah88

Hi, I don't mean to take over the thread, I just wondered if I could get some advice? I started renting a house a few months ago, one of the first thing we asked for is a BER cert, we were assured by the letting agency that this had been done.

So we moved in straight away, made a few phone calls looking for the cert. We were then told after two months that someone would be out to do a BER assessment, that was fine but we just got the result and its a D2!

Before we even got the result the letting agency came and put a sorry looking jacket on the boiler, but nothing more since, so I don't exactly know where to go from here?

I've tried searching the net to try find the typical recommendations given to houses with that rating but no luck,

Any help would be appreciated

BostonB

Theres a requirement to have a BER cert. But not a good BER cert. Older places will probably never have a really good cert, regardless what you do.

So the ONLY way to get a place with a good cert is to only move into a place with one.

noseyhole

is there any legal requirement for the letting agency to have any level of insulation ? what goverment agency looks after ber's ? . bloody freezing :mad:

xper

sarah88 wrote: »

... So we moved in straight away, made a few phone calls looking for the cert. ...

This illustrates what seems to be emerging as a common misconception among tenants about the BER Cert (if they aware of it at all). Getting a BER Cert after the tenancy begins is of very little benefit.

From the horse's mouth (the SEAI):
A BER is an indication of the energy performance of a home.
It covers energy use for space heating, water heating, ventilation and lighting calculated on the basis of standard occupancy.
A BER is similar to the energy label for a household electrical appliance like your fridge. The label has a scale of A-G. A-rated homes are the most energy efficient and will tend to have the lowest energy bills.
From the 1st of January 2009, a BER certificate became compulsory for all homes being sold or offered for rent. If you are buying or renting a house or apartment, you are entitled to a BER so ask the seller, landlord or agent for it.

Note that any property can get a BER Cert. It is an independent, objective assessment of the property's energy profile anywhere from very good to very bad, not a gaurantee of some sort of minimum standard.
Note also the legal requirement is for the cert to be available when the property is being offered because a primary purpose of the cert is to allow the prospective buyer/tenant to determine the energy cost of the home and factor this into their purchase/rent decision.

there are , of course, legal minimum standards for rental accommodation that long predate the BER Cert but they are just minimum standards. So, for example, the property must have an adequate heating system for all habitable rooms ... but there's no rule about how much it might cost you to run this every month.

The only use of a BER cert received by a tenant after you move in is theat it may indicate where improvements in th enrgy rating may be made but your landlord is under no obligation to follow up on these.

BostonB

noseyhole wrote: »

is there any legal requirement for the letting agency to have any level of insulation ? what goverment agency looks after ber's ? . bloody freezing :mad:

No. In simple terms you just have to be able to heat each room.

Marcusm

sarah88 wrote: »

Hi, I don't mean to take over the thread, I just wondered if I could get some advice? I started renting a house a few months ago, one of the first thing we asked for is a BER cert, we were assured by the letting agency that this had been done.

So we moved in straight away, made a few phone calls looking for the cert. We were then told after two months that someone would be out to do a BER assessment, that was fine but we just got the result and its a D2!

Before we even got the result the letting agency came and put a sorry looking jacket on the boiler, but nothing more since, so I don't exactly know where to go from here?

I've tried searching the net to try find the typical recommendations given to houses with that rating but no luck,

Any help would be appreciated

In your case both the landlord and lettting agent committed offences which carry, on summary conviction (district Court), fines of up to EUR5,000 each. If you feel hard done b, perhaps chase the local building control authority to prosecute them. It would likely cause the landlord to issue notice of termination or facilitate adn agreed early termination.

In future, if you're aware of the issue or bothered abut the cost, why not insist on seeing it.

Ray Palmer

odds_on wrote: »

It is actually illegal to "offer for sale or rent" any residential property without a current BER cert - which lasts up to 10 years. However, the powers that be have not got their act together to enforce this law - so it remains up to buyers or renters to ask for the BER cert which they rarely do.

Against a regulation and illegal are different AFAIK. Anybody aware of anybody being fined for this yet? It seems to me many people assume rules and regulation instantly get enforced and are applied instantly.

Often give a time to rectify the situation before they bring in the fine. If a property doesn't comply with regulation they give you at least a month to sort the situation out. I have never heard of somebody instatly being fined and that even goes for public building in breach of fire regulations.

Look at priory hall they were given ample time to rectify the problems before anything real happened. They aren't going to come down on a small LL like a ton of bricks.

As with anything you need to look out for yourself regardless of the regulations. Renting a place and finding that there is no insulation in the attic is really your own fault. I have spent a lot of money upgrading my property and make sure the BER cert is given out but if renters aren't even looking at the things it makes little difference.

BER is also calculated in a pretty useless way so isn't exactley going to tell the average person anything real. It is what we have so it is better than nothing

Marcusm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Against a regulation and illegal are different AFAIK. Anybody aware of anybody being fined for this yet? It seems to me many people assume rules and regulation instantly get enforced and are applied instantly.

Without intending to get into semantics, the regulation specifies that anyone a landlord or lettings agent who fails to provide a BER certificate in these circumstances is guilty of an offence. THis is pretty serious and it seems to be a strict liability offence, i.e. lack of knowledge of the law, absence of criminal intent (mens rea) is not a defence. I doubt that anyone has been prosecuted under the law but that does not change the fact that they are an offender!! (Love that word.)

Too often these matters are brought in as toothless tigers in Ireland, no different from specifying minimum standards for buildings but having an ineffective sign of mechanism.

Unfortunately the regulation specifies that the relevant Building Control Authority (mostly the local or county councils) have the prosecution responsibility and it's a summary matter to be dealt with in the District Courts.

Usually in Ireland any person (a "common informer") can pursue a prosecution in the District Court even if the case has nothing to do with them (back to a time when there was no DPP and such people got rewards for stopping crime). It would be interesting to know whether the wording of the regulation is such that the exclusive prosecuting power is with the local authority or whether anyone could seek a summons. That would be an open season for difficult people!!

odds_on

Marcusm wrote: »

Without intending to get into semantics, the regulation specifies that anyone a landlord or lettings agent who fails to provide a BER certificate in these circumstances is guilty of an offence. THis is pretty serious and it seems to be a strict liability offence, i.e. lack of knowledge of the law, absence of criminal intent (mens rea) is not a defence. I doubt that anyone has been prosecuted under the law but that does not change the fact that they are an offender!! (Love that word.)

Too often these matters are brought in as toothless tigers in Ireland, no different from specifying minimum standards for buildings but having an ineffective sign of mechanism.

Unfortunately the regulation specifies that the relevant Building Control Authority (mostly the local or county councils) have the prosecution responsibility and it's a summary matter to be dealt with in the District Courts.

Usually in Ireland any person (a "common informer") can pursue a prosecution in the District Court even if the case has nothing to do with them (back to a time when there was no DPP and such people got rewards for stopping crime). It would be interesting to know whether the wording of the regulation is such that the exclusive prosecuting power is with the local authority or whether anyone could seek a summons. That would be an open season for difficult people!!

Now, over to the Legal Discussions forum?

But a renter would have something to do with it if he had not been shown a BER cert before signing a lease.

BostonB

odds_on wrote: »

Now, over to the Legal Discussions forum?

But a renter would have something to do with it if he had not been shown a BER cert before signing a lease.

Well you asked...

I don't think there any obligation on a LL to show a BER if they aren't asked.

Marcusm

BostonB wrote: »

Well you asked...

I don't think there any obligation on a LL to show a BER if they aren't asked.

Unfortunately, your thoughts are not in accordance with the law:-

(2) (II) A person who offers [a residential property] for sale or letting (whether in writing or otherwise) ... shall produce a printed copy of the BER certificate (in the form pre-scribed in the Third Schedule to these Regulations) and advisory report in relation to the building to any person expressing an interest in purchasing or taking a letting of the building and, on demand, to the building control authority in whose functional area the building is situated.

"shall" is imperative and is not alleviated by the prospective tenant's lack of interest in or knowledge of the BER cert. (I actually find it difficult to believe that agents and property websites do not insist on this before providing details. In the UK no agent would do this (the law is an EU one). )

Positive obligations are imposed on the landlord and/or lettings agent rather than their being required to respond to reasonable requests of the tenant or prospective tenant.

There is a Law Society Gazette article on this which states that a later provision of the cert does not remedy the offence of not providing at the relevant time. (That being said, no one seems interested in enforcing it.)

BostonB

I stand corrected.

caesarthechimp

The govt. intend to remove properties with an E,F,G BER rating from the rental market, but this is not in force yet, unfortunately.

If there is no insulation at all in the attic, the house would almost certainly have fallen into that range, hence you would have been forewarned of unusually high heating bills and/or unusually cold living conditions.
Assuming the landlord knew this, he may have decided it was not in his interests to commission a BER, in case it drove down the rental price. On the other hand, by breaking the law, he is open to two actions by the tenant. You could report him to the building control officer, making him liable to the €5000 fine and/or 3 months in prison, but that won't do you personally any good. You can also up and move somewhere else, on the basis that the lease is legally invalid.

BostonB

Would that remove a lot of the the older houses. off the market as uneconomical to upgrade to those standards?

caesarthechimp

Its rarely "uneconomical" to save money on your fuel bills.
And nothing is more uneconomical than leaving a property idle because you are not allowed to rent it out.
The sticking point normally arises when the person who is paying for the insulation upgrade is not the person who is paying the bills. In that situation, nothing tends to get done.

odds_on

Enrate wrote: »

The govt. intend to remove properties with an E,F,G BER rating from the rental market, but this is not in force yet, unfortunately.

If there is no insulation at all in the attic, the house would almost certainly have fallen into that range, hence you would have been forewarned of unusually high heating bills and/or unusually cold living conditions.
Assuming the landlord knew this, he may have decided it was not in his interests to commission a BER, in case it drove down the rental price. On the other hand, by breaking the law, he is open to two actions by the tenant. You could report him to the building control officer, making him liable to the €5000 fine and/or 3 months in prison, but that won't do you personally any good. You can also up and move somewhere else, on the basis that the lease is legally invalid.

The Law Society of Ireland has suggested that a lease signed without seeing a BER cert could make the lease invalid. However, it has not yet been proven in a court of law and therefore no precedence has been set.

It would be interesting to see what the PRTB would say - but then, that might well take a year or two for an adjudication but would not set a legal precedence.

It is possible that the BER rating may be included in some way, into the new household charge that the government are working on.

caesarthechimp

However, under those circumstances, it would be a foolish landlord that would risk going to court and being the one to set the precedent, when all they had to do was tear up the lease and allow the tenant to leave. The legal costs would be substantial, which is why we probably won't be seeing that precedent set any time soon.

beertons

Was talking to a building surveyor and solicitor last week, they said that the BER is not worth the paper it's written on. Ask the landlord to insulate the roof/ceiling. If he does, happy days. If he doesn't, tell him you want your deposit back and move out asap.

odds_on

beertons wrote: »

Was talking to a building surveyor and solicitor last week, they said that the BER is not worth the paper it's written on. Ask the landlord to insulate the roof/ceiling. If he does, happy days. If he doesn't, tell him you want your deposit back and move out asap.

And how would a solicitor be qualified to say that?

But he must have a legal reason to be able to move out and get his deposit back. Just because the property is not insulated is not a justifiable reason.

beertons

Solicitor was a sister of the surveyor. If the house is not what was advertised, move. House we just bought got a Bsomething BER. We had to lol when we saw it written down. No porch, hasn't been insulated since it was built 16 years ago. Not an energy saving lightbulb in sight. Anyway, that's going ot.

Marcusm

Enrate wrote: »

However, under those circumstances, it would be a foolish landlord that would risk going to court and being the one to set the precedent, when all they had to do was tear up the lease and allow the tenant to leave. The legal costs would be substantial, which is why we probably won't be seeing that precedent set any time soon.

I think you're missing a vital point; it's irrelevant whether the house was let or whether a lease exists. The offence is committed is the property is offered for letting and a BER cert is not offered to any person expressing interest in the property. For example if the property is advertised on a website and a person asks to veiw it, a BER cert must be provided (likely even if the viewing doesn't proceed). In other European countries, the law is enforced on the basis that the BER cert must be provided in advance of the viewing. Providing the bER cert later does not vitiate the offence although it is likely to mean that a prosecution would likely not be pursued.

odds_on

Enrate wrote: »

However, under those circumstances, it would be a foolish landlord that would risk going to court and being the one to set the precedent, when all they had to do was tear up the lease and allow the tenant to leave. The legal costs would be substantial, which is why we probably won't be seeing that precedent set any time soon.

If the tenants have been in occupation for more than 6 months, the landlord can tear up leases as much as he likes but the fact remains that the tenants have the right to remain in the property for four years under a Part 4 tenancy. Incidentally, leases do not have to be written, they can be verbal or implied.

Furthermore, a fixed term lease cannot be broken save for breach of the terms and conditions, or by mutual agreement.

JoeCole26

Hey all,

I'm in a similar situation. Moved in 3 months ago and 2 bedroom house is freezing! The bathroom is probably colder than it is outside. There is no insulation in the house at all (old house that was renovated). We do have gas heating but not great radiators and is costing us a fortune just to keep warm. so frustrating!

Have never received a BER rating an doubt there is one. We have informed the LL that is freezing and they installed a small fan heater in bathroom but doesn't have much affect and costs alot to run!

It's depressing being here and would really love to get out of lease with my deposit back.

Any ideas?

odds_on

JoeCole26 wrote: »

Hey all,

I'm in a similar situation. Moved in 3 months ago and 2 bedroom house is freezing! The bathroom is probably colder than it is outside. There is no insulation in the house at all (old house that was renovated). We do have gas heating but not great radiators and is costing us a fortune just to keep warm. so frustrating!

Have never received a BER rating an doubt there is one. We have informed the LL that is freezing and they installed a small fan heater in bathroom but doesn't have much affect and costs alot to run!

It's depressing being here and would really love to get out of lease with my deposit back.

Any ideas?

Basically, you are stuck in the property unless you can assign the lease to another person. Find a better property at the end of the lease, when you are free to leave.

The following is not a direct hit at you, JoeCole26, but just my general feeling.
The modern generation seem to want everything but don't want to pay for it. If you want a good quality house with all the right things that are not specified in the minimum standards for rented property then you must pay more.
At the lower end of the rental market, where there seem to be the most complaints, much of the rental value of a property is determined by how much the SW will pay. Thus, the rent is higher than if there was no "minimum" as given by the SW.
When I was of school-going age, nowhere that I lived had central heating, the properties did not have insulation and in general, we lived in cold draughty houses. At best, we had a fireplace in every room. Never did I have a fire in my bedroom. If you rent this type of property, you should expect the same.

JoeCole26

odds_on wrote: »

JoeCole26 wrote: »

Hey all,

I'm in a similar situation. Moved in 3 months ago and 2 bedroom house is freezing! The bathroom is probably colder than it is outside. There is no insulation in the house at all (old house that was renovated). We do have gas heating but not great radiators and is costing us a fortune just to keep warm. so frustrating!

Have never received a BER rating an doubt there is one. We have informed the LL that is freezing and they installed a small fan heater in bathroom but doesn't have much affect and costs alot to run!

It's depressing being here and would really love to get out of lease with my deposit back.

Any ideas?

Basically, you are stuck in the property unless you can assign the lease to another person. Find a better property at the end of the lease, when you are free to leave.

The following is not a direct hit at you, JoeCole26, but just my general feeling.
The modern generation seem to want everything but don't want to pay for it. If you want a good quality house with all the right things that are not specified in the minimum standards for rented property then you must pay more.
At the lower end of the rental market, where there seem to be the most complaints, much of the rental value of a property is determined by how much the SW will pay. Thus, the rent is higher than if there was no "minimum" as given by the SW.
When I was of school-going age, nowhere that I lived had central heating, the properties did not have insulation and in general, we lived in cold draughty houses. At best, we had a fireplace in every room. Never did I have a fire in my bedroom. If you rent this type of property, you should expect the same.

Thats the thing,I'm 635 per month for a 2 bedroom 1 bathroom! So not ad though I've gone for somewhere cheap and I'm expecting everything but I know what you mean!!

caesarthechimp

Marcusm wrote: »

I think you're missing a vital point; it's irrelevant whether the house was let or whether a lease exists. The offence is committed is the property is offered for letting and a BER cert is not offered to any person expressing interest in the property.

I agree, and I'm not missing that point. I'm just saying that from the OP/tenants point of view, prosecuting the landlord is not the priority. That is the job of the Building Control Officer, which is why some BCO's have asked auctioneers for a copy of the list of all the properties they have for sale and rent, with the corresponding BERs. The tenant just wants to know if they can tear up the lease and go somewhere warmer.

odds_on wrote: »

Furthermore, a fixed term lease cannot be broken save for breach of the terms and conditions, or by mutual agreement.

Any contract, including a lease, is invalid if there were any illegal shenanigans in it's making. In this case the illegality is the non-disclosure of the BER.

JoeCole26 wrote: »

Have never received a BER rating an doubt there is one.... would really love to get out of lease with my deposit back.
Any ideas?

Contact the landlord, giving him a month's notice, and tell him you believe the lease to be invalid due to "the non disclosure of the BER at the time the property was offered for rent". The chances are he/she will accept. If not, you lose nothing. You can stay on, or you have the option of taking it to a solicitor if you want to go further.