How important is a decent BER rating?

fret_wimp2

The vast majority of houses in dublin are of BER D1 or lower, increase any searches to only include C3 or higher and results drop drastically in MyHome.

It seems that when you get up to A & B Levels BER can have a large increase on price but that trickles off from C downward.

Generally speaking, from people with experience in this area, how important are the BER Ratings and how do they relate to eachother?

i.e. is a BER of E or lower an IceBox in winter? or is a C3 much more energy efficient than a D1?

Michael D Not Higgins

The BER is a qualitative rather than quantitative assessment. As such I wouldn't rely too heavily on the numbers. The C3 might be better than the D1 or vice versa. A levels are generally on newer builds so would explain the lack of results and higher prices.

Santa Cruz

I think that the BER can be put in the same category as the Health and Safety Statement at work. Just another bureaucratic demand of no use

gaius c

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

The vast majority of houses in dublin are of BER D1 or lower, increase any searches to only include C3 or higher and results drop drastically in MyHome.

It seems that when you get up to A & B Levels BER can have a large increase on price but that trickles off from C downward.

Generally speaking, from people with experience in this area, how important are the BER Ratings and how do they relate to eachother?

i.e. is a BER of E or lower an IceBox in winter? or is a C3 much more energy efficient than a D1?

There's quite a few folk with agendas on this matter who will dismiss/extol the the BER rating system but what they are intended to be is a guide to the property's energy efficiency. I would especially question the motives of people dismissing them entirely.

Anything of E or lower is going to be quite cold in winter.On the other hand, a house with A-C ratings will be a good bit easier to heat than BER F/G houses but differences between ratings close to each other are debatable.

There is also the problem that the vendor pays for the BER assessment and it's curious how when errors do happen in the BER rating, it always seems to give a more generous rating.

Use them with caution and apply your own common sense.

MicktheMan

gaius c wrote: »

There's quite a few folk with agendas on this matter who will dismiss/extol the the BER rating system but what they are intended to be is a guide to the property's energy efficiency. I would especially question the motives of people dismissing them entirely.

I know what I'm saying below is not an apples to apples comparison but is the best I can think of when people ask "how important are the BER Ratings and how do they relate to eachother"

If you were to compare the BER system of a 2nd hand house to the testing of cars (NCT), cars would be rated as follows:
The age of the car would be noted.
The engine size and fuel type would be noted.
The number of seat belts would be noted.
The size of the exhaust pipe would be noted.
The mpg would be assumed.
The number of wheels would be noted but the condition of the tyres would be ignored.
Etc etc.
The engine would not be turned on, and the emissions, brakes, lights, suspension, seatbelts ets etc would not be tested to be operational / safe.
Everything noted above would then be inputted into the computer program and a rating would be produced. Voila!

Now, how much faith would you put into this rating system if it applied to car testing? Would you trust it when buying?

So you could buy a valid "A" or "B" rated house and the heating system could be bunched, the insulation could be missing, and the place could well leak air like a sieve.:eek:

gaius c

Like I say, I would especially question the motives of people dismissing BER Ratings entirely.

@MicktheMan
Have you ever actually read a BER report? They are quite detailed and look at a lot of different aspects that buyers should be aware of before bidding such as the condition of the windows and the attic insulation (which would generally not be accessible during a viewing).

Also, kilowatt hour ratings are measured so your "mpg would be assumed" is misleading nonsense.

ash23

I can only comment based on experience.

I lived in a house with a D rating. It was an older house but newly renovated. My oil bill was about 200 per month in winter, half that in summer. ESB bill was about 100 per month. 80 in summer. The house was cold unless heating was on in winter and it didn't hold the heat.

I now live in a new build house with solar panels and great insulation and a B rating.
Gas is the method of heating and my gas bills are about 75 in winter per month and we literally use no gas in summer. The house heats up very quickly and retains the heat. ESB bill is also way down in summer as we don't need hot water.

As I said I don't know the ins and outs of the ber certificate but I've found that living in a higher rated house has impacted the cost and comfort of how we live.

MicktheMan

gaius c wrote: »

Like I say, I would especially question the motives of people dismissing BER Ratings entirely.

I have no motive here except to point out that in a significant number of cases, the BER cert is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike. If one wants to know how the house really will perform come winter then, unfortunately, a BER cert isn't a reliable indicator for the average consumer.

gaius c wrote: »

@MicktheMan
Have you ever actually read a BER report? They are quite detailed and look at a lot of different aspects that buyers should be aware of before bidding such as the condition of the windows and the attic insulation (which would generally not be accessible during a viewing).

I have indeed.
BER reports are generated automatically by the software, so garbage in, garbage out. Take the condition of the windows for example; The BER report might say something like

"Windows with a heat loss greater than the current building standards (i.e. have a U-Value > 2) could be improved. However, it should be noted that best benefits are achieved through the upgrade from single to low E double or triple glazing. Note that single glazing can also be improved by adding secondary glazing rather than changing to proprietary double glazing."

Well, no sh1t Sherlock, window performance can be improved by upgrading to dg or tg units.
What it doesn't say about the windows (which is more important in real life) is whether the seals on the windows are effective or whether the windows were installed airtight or not. The reason why it doesn't report this is that measuring the air tightness of the windows is not part of the assessment.

gaius c wrote: »

Also, kilowatt hour ratings are measured so your "mpg would be assumed" is misleading nonsense.

Which brings me to the last point about measurement. The only items generally "measured" in a BER assessment of a 2nd hand house, are the areas of the roof, walls, floors and windows, insulation thickness if accessable (generally only the attic).
There is no measurement, whatsoever, of the actual performance of the insulation, the air tightness (draughts) of the building, the efficiency of the boiler / distribution system (or even if it works). Nearly everything else is assumed based on property age. So saying the "kilowatt hour ratings are measured" is, to put it your way, misleading nonsense.

zagmund

I would take the BER as a general guidance only and definitely not rely on it being an absolute. As Mick says above, it appears that not a whole lot of actual measurement goes on.

We got a B1 for our refurb, but we lost points (or whatever way it's measured) because in a house with ~40 energy efficient LEDs and a single CFL in the attic (which might be on for 10 hours in a busy year) we were marked down with "not all bulbs are energy efficient". There's no grading of this - we may as well have had 50 CFLs or incandescent bulbs and we would have got the same result.

I think they are valuable as guidelines, but they could be a whole lot more valuable if actual tests & measurements (heat maps, etc . . .) were carried out.

z

gaius c

MicktheMan wrote: »

I have no motive here except to point out that in a significant number of cases, the BER cert is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike. If one wants to know how the house really will perform come winter then, unfortunately, a BER cert isn't a reliable indicator for the average consumer.



I have indeed.
BER reports are generated automatically by the software, so garbage in, garbage out. Take the condition of the windows for example; The BER report might say something like

"Windows with a heat loss greater than the current building standards (i.e. have a U-Value > 2) could be improved. However, it should be noted that best benefits are achieved through the upgrade from single to low E double or triple glazing. Note that single glazing can also be improved by adding secondary glazing rather than changing to proprietary double glazing."

Well, no sh1t Sherlock, window performance can be improved by upgrading to dg or tg units.
What it doesn't say about the windows (which is more important in real life) is whether the seals on the windows are effective or whether the windows were installed airtight or not. The reason why it doesn't report this is that measuring the air tightness of the windows is not part of the assessment.


Which brings me to the last point about measurement. The only items generally "measured" in a BER assessment of a 2nd hand house, are the areas of the roof, walls, floors and windows, insulation thickness if accessable (generally only the attic).
There is no measurement, whatsoever, of the actual performance of the insulation, the air tightness (draughts) of the building, the efficiency of the boiler / distribution system (or even if it works). Nearly everything else is assumed based on property age. So saying the "kilowatt hour ratings are measured" is, to put it your way, misleading nonsense.

Those add cost. They are fine for general guidance before you put a bid on a house and you can shell out for a proper survey later.

If one wants to know how the house really will perform come winter then, unfortunately, a BER cert isn't a reliable indicator for the average consumer.

It's a pretty good general indicator actually.
A BER F/G house will be cold in winter, no ifs or buts.
A C/D house should be better and an A/B house will be better again. That's all it needs to be, a rough guide.

gaius c

zagmund wrote: »

I would take the BER as a general guidance only and definitely not rely on it being an absolute. As Mick says above, it appears that not a whole lot of actual measurement goes on.

We got a B1 for our refurb, but we lost points (or whatever way it's measured) because in a house with ~40 energy efficient LEDs and a single CFL in the attic (which might be on for 10 hours in a busy year) we were marked down with "not all bulbs are energy efficient". There's no grading of this - we may as well have had 50 CFLs or incandescent bulbs and we would have got the same result.

I think they are valuable as guidelines, but they could be a whole lot more valuable if actual tests & measurements (heat maps, etc . . .) were carried out.

z

And what would it have been without the fluorescent lamp? A2?
Distinction between adjacent sub-grades is up for debate but what a prospective buyer will know is that your house is not an F/G fridge and is better than the C/D so is therefore higher spec than most houses on the market.

That's all it needs to be for bidding and they can do a proper survey after they go sale agreed.

L1011

gaius c wrote: »

@MicktheMan
Have you ever actually read a BER report? They are quite detailed and look at a lot of different aspects that buyers should be aware of before bidding such as the condition of the windows and the attic insulation (which would generally not be accessible during a viewing).

The "detail" is boilerplate from the software. Its often contradictory or sometimes actually nonsensical as a result.


At best the BER rating gives you a better than 50/50 chance of knowing whether a house is going to be good, OK or crap at holding heat/costing you a packet. That's all. If they simply had A, C and F and ignored everything in between we'd actually have a useful system.

BER brings nothing extra (except expense) that a reasonably clued in buyer wouldn't have been able to work out by asking himself the question 'would this house be hard to keep warm?'

ted1

gaius c wrote: »

Like I say, I would especially question the motives of people dismissing BER Ratings entirely.

@MicktheMan
Have you ever actually read a BER report? They are quite detailed and look at a lot of different aspects that buyers should be aware of before bidding such as the condition of the windows and the attic insulation (which would generally not be accessible during a viewing).

Also, kilowatt hour ratings are measured so your "mpg would be assumed" is misleading nonsense.

Thee not quite detailed, there a genetic copy and paste

spaceHopper

I would always ask to see the BER report, it shows that the seller is actually selling rather than testing the market or keeping the bank happy, if you go sale agreed you still needed to get and engineers report done.
The BER reports aren't that great but it will give you an idea of how the house is constructed, for example, to insulate cavity block you need to put insulation in side the room or outside the wall, where as wit a cavity wall you can pump it for a fraction of the cost, also the windows..... it's worth having the report but if you got three different firms to do one you could get three different results.

As a rule of thumb 90% of Dublin house built in the 60 70 and 80 will be cavity block and poorly insulated you will need to do work. If it has a good BER report then some work might have been done so ask. If it's in very good condition inside, nicely decorated... but has a poor BER report then expect to be taking it apart to insulate, wire and plump in better heating, change the windows... so if you had to choose between a wreck of a house and that one on the same street I'd go with the cheapest because at the end of the day you will do the same work and spend the same money.

gaius c

L1011 wrote: »

The "detail" is boilerplate from the software. Its often contradictory or sometimes actually nonsensical as a result.


At best the BER rating gives you a better than 50/50 chance of knowing whether a house is going to be good, OK or crap at holding heat/costing you a packet. That's all. If they simply had A, C and F and ignored everything in between we'd actually have a useful system.

That's basically what I said.

L1011

gaius c wrote: »

That's basically what I said.

You said they were detailed - they're not; they're page after page of boilerplate puff.

Nothing that someone who actually looks at the house can't figure out either.

Chocolate

My apartment (built 2002) got a D1 Ber rating in 2009.
The Duplex directly above me received a C2 rating the same year from a different assessor.

Building materials were the same, windows, doors were the same, boilers were the same. Neither of us had carried out any alterations to our homes.

While I accept that my apartment probably heated his Duplex, I don't think that this merited such a difference in ratings.