With the end of the Green Deal as we know it, I don’t envy BRE chief executive Peter Bonfield’s task of coming up with a replacement scheme. I especially applaud his commitment that consumers will be at the heart of any new proposal.
Of the Green Deal’s many faults were its poor value for consumers and financing over the term of the agreement. The number of Green Deal surveys undertaken and not followed through probably reflects the common sense applied by many homeowners who thought they could source and work more cheaply and on better terms.
Grant-funded schemes are very much like work completed on insurance: they tend to be more costly than if you were doing the work under your own steam.
"Grant-funded schemes are very much like work completed on insurance: they tend to be more costly than if you were doing the work under your own steam."
The challenges are vast, though. A general public fed a diet of rogue traders programmes on TV, combined with technologies outside the understanding of many, and resistance to any form of compulsion or interference in people’s homes, and the road is not just steep, it’s almost vertical. It could also be a vote loser.
So what does putting the consumer first actually mean? At the top of the list would be performance. Would the retrofit or improvements really deliver what is promised? Next would be payback. Is the payback period reasonable? Does the investment add value? In other words: would my house be worth more as a result?
Will there be proper installation by skilled operatives that does not undermine other property; warranties that can be enforced, even if the original installer has ceased to trade; and solid barriers to entry to the market to deter rogue traders? Some of these ideas might run against the government’s objective to reduce regulation and make it possible to get things done. On the other hand sometimes regulation is needed to provide a level playing field and protection for consumers.
A scheme with consumers at its heart will have to be very different to the Green Deal. The whingeing from the various bodies that represent vested interests suggests it suited parts of the industry better than the consumer.
The challenge facing Bonfield’s review is the same for all of us: people and their skills. Consumers should pay the same attention to the people they allow to work on their biggest asset as they would a specialist doctor who is going to treat their nearest and dearest. I look forward to March next year to see what Bonfield and his review comes up with.
