A number of estate agents flouting rules on EPCs look set to escape prosecution – for the time being at least – and some may not even be challenged.
A research sample by EAT has confirmed that some agents are in breach of the requirement to attach the first page of the EPC, complete with the full address, to property particulars, including online.
The requirement has been underlined on several occasions by the Department of Communities and Local Government.
CLG insists the measure is essential to avoid fraud, and that it consulted on it beforehand.
Some agents are redacting addresses, while others are managing to display them less than clearly, and others are not attaching the front page of the new EPC at all but simply showing the graphs.
Agents who are redacting the address include Marsh & Parsons, the multi-award winning firm of agents. Marsh & Parsons also appear to be taking out the EPC’s reference number.
Managing director Peter Rollings said: “We are redacting the relevant personal information from the EPC in order to protect the confidentiality of our clients.”
He added: "This decision is in compliance with regulations which allow the address to be removed in certain circumstances - to be exact - clause 2(c) of The Energy Performance of Buildings (Certificates and Inspections) (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 201)."
Eric Walker, managing director of London agents Bushells, said: “We are complying-ish. And more than others.”
Some well-known agents who are redacting addresses did not answer emails sent by EAT, despite promptings.
But our straw poll did draw answers from agents who confirmed that they are complying. These included Spicerhaart, Winkworth and upmarket Knightsbridge agent WA Ellis.
James Wyatt of Barton Wyatt, the Surrey agent dealing with super-rich clients including on the Wentworth estate, said: “We are toeing the line, showing the full page of the EPC on new instructions.
“We’re not redacting information, as that is not allowed, and anyway, none of our clients care two hoots about it.
“It is the agents who are up in arms because the ability to ‘tout’ has become instantly much easier. Frankly, we are relaxed about this as we keep in close touch with our clients. This is not so easy for the high-volume agents.”
Meanwhile, CLG is under pressure to drop the requirement to show a property’s full address.
Terry Holmes, of Essex agents Beresfords, has raised the issue directly with CLG, saying that it does not take account of vulnerable customers whose address will be available online for all to see.
He has told CLG: “In the case of a retirement complex, for example, any person with criminal motives will be able to go to the front door and use the security intercom system to go direct to the elderly person whose property is on the market.
“Whilst you may have consulted trade bodies, it would appear that no one, government included, considered the security issue.
“I would urge you to allow the address to be hidden at the initial point of an inquiry, when people view details online.”
EAT has seen informal advice given by one Trading Standards department indicating that they will not be policing EPCs with redacted addresses.
A spokesman for CLG said: “Councils are responsible for enforcing EPC compliance and Trading Standards officers have discretion to determine the appropriate action in each case. This will range between providing information and assistance to issuing warnings or a penalty charge notice.
“It is important to recognise that legal action should be seen as the option of last resort. Much Trading Standards enforcement activity is aimed at prompting those responsible into taking the necessary steps to comply with the regulations, rather than immediately issuing penalty notices in every instance.”
.png)
Comments
You have all had ya rant, you have changed, err nuffin!
Have you not seen the endless posts from the likes of rantrave, Jonnie, they have changed, nuffin!
and what is the point of moaning about big agents area managers, costs etc on an EA web site! Their fees are the same as yours, its thier choice to have them, or not! If they have higher fees that makes them better negotiators than you!
Get on with it!
basically the EPC is there to flog energy saving measures such as Photovoltaic systems, isn't it a shame that the messsage doesn't come with a clear health warnings
"The roof belongs to the mortgage company until you have paid them off"
How about Caution, fitting the crappy energy saving light bulbs means you will not get a good look at the burglar until they have warmed up.
How about one on condesser boilers? yes you will only heat the water you use apart from the 6 litres that goes down the plug hole waiting for anything above luke warm, great if you don't have a water meter!
SI 2452:
“(4) Where written particulars are made available and the address of the building is not included in those particulars, the person mentioned in paragraph (1)(c) may omit the address of the building from the copy of the first page of the energy performance certificate
attached to the particulars in accordance with paragraph (2), notwithstanding the requirement to include the address imposed by regulation 11(1)(d)(ii).
(5) Paragraph (4) does not permit the omission of the address of the building from a
certificate in any circumstances other than those mentioned in that paragraph.”.
Anyone who decides to ignore the Law should be prosecuted.
Fines should be per property in breach of regs - big agents would get big fines.
PLUS if you want really effective policing - here is a simple idea. Tell the Landlord of Seller THEY will also get fined if their agent doesn't comply - sorted.
That said - we dont comply - why? Because I will be blowed if I am going to hand the likes of Foxtons or KFH another commercial advantge
I do wonder endlessly at the likes of KFH, Foxtons, et-al. How the public cannot get a grasp of what Estate Agency is about and how it works.
The chaps and chapettes in the branch, sell and progress the vendors property sale. The people in branch do the write up on the property, the viewings, the negotiations, etc.
There are a whole bunch of people further up the food chain in the corporate estate agent who do absolutely nothing towards selling a vendors property.
But... the vendor pays for:
Area Manager who has no input into the sale
Area Managers stuff, car, phone, laptopp & ego.
Regional Manager who has no input into the sale
Regional Managers stuf, car, phone, laptop & ego
Sales Director who has no input into the sale
Sales Directors stuf, includes much more cost such as bigger car, better phone, better laptop, big office, lovely secretary, big expense account & ego.
Then there is the grand head office to pay for, shareholders to pay dividends to and a board of directors on fat salaries who will be a finance chap, marketing chap, sales chap, legal chap, and so on. All these people will employ other people in their teams to have a total staff of between 50 and 100 people.
Then:
The vendor instructs the corporate, pays a big fat fee if they sell, so they can pay for all of the above.
BUT IT WAS THE BRANCH THAT SOLD THE PROPERTY
The hangers on in the corporates do nothing towards selling houses. BUT VENDORS PAY FOR THEM
Funny old world.
We looked at our 10 biggest competitors websites - 3 complied fully.
Trading Standards cant police that level of dissent.
EPC's do serve a purpose but there is no need to reveal addresses. Property could be vacant and revealing address could give green light to burglars, squatters etc.
Interesting how the world changes.
I was laughing when I saw their respective reviews on All Agents
Foxtons: 2.27 out of 5.00
KFH - 1.56 out of 5.00
All's not well at KFH from what we hear......... touting like mad* - slashing fees* - now ignoring the Law*
*allegedly (!)
Most Agents tell us that nobody is looking at this document.
Reason being, is the general public are not aware and are not told by the Agents there is a 4 page report with recommendations which actually exists.
Most people wrongly think it's just a graph.
What is required initially here, is the graph, under which should read. 'Full report with recommendations available with Agent'.
Foxtons - no surprise
KFH ????? .... to quote their website:
Latest legislation: The property market is always changing, which means plenty of new opportunities. But it can also mean new legislation which we at KFH have to become familiar with very quickly.
EPCs for rented properties and Tenancy Deposit Protection scheme are just a couple of examples, but we’ll make sure you’re fully informed with every change in legislation and in the market so we can give you the best advice. [even if we are so big we cant simply ignore the Law]
"Some well-known agents who are redacting addresses did not answer emails sent by EAT, despite promptings."
Having done a bit of checking and eliminating those who have commented and those who comply - that leaves Foxtons and KFH then.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10470071
Get Mr Clegg on it.
Nick Clegg calls for ideas on to laws to be repealed.
Nick Clegg has asked the public to nominate laws and regulations they would like to see abolished.
In his speech, in London, Mr Clegg said he believed the process would identify laws that make people "feel under threat" and "serve no real purpose".
One agent locally said to a vendor "The Law says we have to publish your address online - which means you will get people knocking at the door. We put your interest first and ignore this because we care about our clients"
Mmmmmm.
Comment of the day from EW
"We are complying-ish."
Made me smile.
Ray - the leaders of the property industry are not really 'leaders' - they are self appointed self serving people scared to comment.
The real leaders are the agents who stand up and be counted by actually leading from the front.
@sceptic is spot on. Law relates to the EPC as a whole - not an extract of the same.
One page is an extract - so redact away.
Some refreshing honesty and some good advice and opinion.
Simply - its a mess and respect to those who have taken a view and been transparent about their reasons for acting as they have.
If everyone redacted addresses - what would happen?
@Sceptic - I agree - if you actually take the time to read the new legal documentation (ignore the incorrect guidance) you'll see for yourselves that redacting the address is perfectly fine !!! Once the front page is detached (as is asked) it no longer becomes 'the certificate' but 'the front page of the certificate' - legally x2 different things !!!!!
Lots of good commentsabout the detail of compliance.
However, in my view it is the requirement to show the amount of info. that is the problem and very wasteful.
All that was needed was the original graph, WITH attached info. on how to obtain the detailed report, if interested in it.. The current requirements should be scrapped. Where are the 'leaders' of this industry, who should be lobbying hard? (Keeping their heads down whilst waiting for pensions?)
@Peter - I wasn't criticising, complaining or expressing opinion regarding Law. Just an observation matey.
450 peolple on the site, not much work going on then!
Lettings Guru on 2012-05-16 10:58:13
Walker & Rollings admit to non compliance - but at least they have the balls to do so.
I am fed up with the anonymity of people and such candour is a refreshing change.
Then you post with no name!
The statutory instrument relating to the EPC changes (2011, No. 2452) that became law in April 2012 allows for the address to be omited - refer to Section 2. (5)(e).
It is the subsequent DCLG 'guidance' document (which DCLG caveats as being unable to provide legal advice) and the technical solution introduction by Landmark to only redact commercial property addresses that has changed this.
I for one firmly believe I am not 'flouting the law', I am working to it and until a new statutory instrument is issued changing the rules on redaction I'm confident that trading standards do not have a leg to stand on!
EW is right - its not about touting and people who think otherwise are naive or don't work in the business.
Would you arrange a viewing without getting a name and number? No. Its basic neg training to call back to verify a number before meeting a buyer.
Fewer people want boards up as they don't want pages of leaflets or cold callers.
There is no benefit to having the address - its meant to be about energy efficiency afterall.
Walker & Rollings admit to non compliance - but at least they have the balls to do so.
I am fed up with the anonymity of people and such candour is a refreshing change.
Ros should list the agents who refused to comment and dont comply
EW is spot on.
Touting is non stop anyway. His comment regarding the fact that the address offer no benefit is very profound and utterly true.
There is no benefit to anyone other than those who have a reason to approach the property directly.
Great points well made.
When we went on a valuation, we told the vendor (amongst other things) that an EPC was required in order to market a commercial property.
When we followed up the appointment we were told that a rival agent told them an EPC was not needed until solicitors were instrcuted.
Guess who got the instruction. What is the point in a 'law' when there is so much flagrancy?
OK - hands up. I will be totally honest about this.
We comply with the spirit of the Law and publish the full EPC first page as required.
We do not comply with the letter of the Law as we redact the full postal address. The address offers NO useful beneficial information whatsoever - it only serves to allow direct approaches from buyers or other agents.
I agree with Peter Rollings (don't tell him).
Many clients do not want their address given out until we know to whom the address is given and that we will accompany any visits. I realise this in not perfect, but its better than a free for all.
This has been a particular issue with some high value clients, vacant properties, and elderly clients. This is NOT an excuse - its a fact. I cannot lose an instruction when so many other ignore the Law.
This isn't about touting. Any good agent doing a decent job won't lose the instruction because a competitor sends a letter, card or door knocks. Besides, many have watertight Sole Agency agreements.
Those cynics who believe its about anti touting obviously don't work in our areas. Tout is incessant and omnipresent. The difference with publishing an address is that it just becomes a little cheaper - however, good agents will agree - its the NEW instructions we want - not those that haven't sold.
@ Tezza
I don't / can't support the inclusion of the full address. I totally agree that it is an unecessary part of these new regs.
I still can't see why EAs are bleating about non existant security issues when they are clearly only worried about touting.
If EAs hadn't been so anti EPCs and hadn't expoloited all the loopholes for the last few years, we wouldn't have been seeing these new draconian rules at all.
The Poll Tax was a Law. That went well.
We need to stand up and be counted - well done Peter Rollings.
There are plenty of Laws people chose to ignore - MP's are a good example.......
Again in our area we are the only ones compling with the law!! Bairstow Eves, Dixons and Connells are not - these are the ones who should be made an example of especially as they are the ones who are CONSTANTLY board touting all of the properties in our area!!
It is 'nanny satate' forcing people (in this case Agents) to do something they neither want to do or need to do, no matter what.
If someone wants to see an EPC they can see it online at Landmark or ask the agent for it.
The elbow patch, hush puppy wearing 'do gooder' brigade win again.
Yep - KFH are at it 24/7. So are Foxtons, but at least they don't pretend.
Until a big agent is made an example of, smaller ones wont put themselves at a commercial disadvantage. Why would they?
Worst offender is Kinleigh Folkard & Hayward. AND they use it to tout as a matter of policy as I discovered when I interviewed one of their negs 2 weeks ago.
Astonishing stuff. So.... I reported this to Trading Standards and they said they weren't able to investigate the EPC issue as they were 'unclear and awaiting advice regarding enforcement'.
So I reported their fly boards instead.... ;)
TSO do NOT have the resources to police this stupid European directive ignored by Europe.
I respect the people who have gone on record. Guess what - no one will take any action. Its a total nonsense.
No one wants to read an EPC anyway.
On the DPA issue, I think (the last time I read it) that there is something in there about the definition of personal data.
--------------------------------
“personal data” means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified—
(a)from those data [...]
---------------------------
I'm not sure my reading of that extends to address......so think the DPA bleat is a red herring, IMO.
Unless, of course, you put in that the vendor is 52 and gay, where you 'probably' would be breaching DPA...... :-)
@ unimpressed
Up until now, low life have had to get off their backsides and walk or drive round areas until they can find a suitable victim to charge £5k for cleaning leaves out of the gutter, rifle a handbag bag while their mate keeps the old lady talking or even worse....I don't intend to go there.
Now they can just go onto Rightmove, search retirement properties,bungalows etc and do their homweork from the comfort of their armchair.
Tell you what 'Unimpressed', people have given good reasons why an address shouldn't be included, why don't you give us a valid reason why it SHOULD!
Attitudes to EPC’s would soon change if government let the local authorities keep any fines they acquired by investigating agents rather than giving it back to central government. What local authority is going to spend money, time and resources investigating EPC breaches and get nothing in return?
I have to agree with EW on this, compliant-ish. Display the EPC in the manner it was intended without compromising your clients and your own business. Trading standards would be better advised to going after the agents than have no EPC’s what so ever rather than the ones that block out a door number.
Data Protection Act! Security! What other red herrings can you guys dream up. Anyone would think you were being forced to identify the personal details of the occupant rather than just a property address.
There aren't any valid reasons to hide an address apart from anti touting and you should admit that. Trying to challenge the new laws based on stupid excuses rather than the truth doesn't help your cause.
Due to an unrepealed law it is legal to kill a Welshman with a longbow in York
Seems entirely reasonable to me.
@Chris Holmes
BTW I am assuming from your attitude that you have never, EVER broken even a tiny law.
You have never broken the speed limit.
You have never allowed you dog to poo on the pavement.
You have never been caught short and taken a pee in a bush.
You have never been drunk in a pub.
You have never broken an egg at the sharp end.
You have never eaten a mince pie on Christmas Day.
All of these things are currently illegal under British Law.
Careful how you respond, you could end up at Her Majesty's pleasure.
I have to say that that was a lot of fun!
@Chris Holmes et al
This is a STUPID, unthought out part of a generally irrelevant (to the consumer - not to government policy - think carbon emissions targets...) law.
In fact, if you think about it, it is actually FORCING estate agents to infringe another law:
The Data Protection Act.
Which has much stiffer penalties.
Which law should I break?
If an agent is not complying with this simple bit of legislation what else are they not complying with, deposit protection, data protection, VAT, insurance, property misdescriptions etc: etc;
If they are found not to be complying what happens? a word in their ear and they carry on doing the same.
If a DEA though fails an EPC audit on a simple point they have two more EPCs audited and if one of them fails they are suspended.
Now how many people know that little gem?
DEAs are often expected to work for a derisory fee, same fee for 1 bed flat as 6 bed 3 storey house cannot be right, yet our liability for any errors is extremely high and the low cost DEA from 1st April is now even more of a fool.
Whoops I digressed, sorry.
If an agent has publicly declared non compliance with the new EPC rules then they shpuld be prosecuted immediately for such a bare faced attitude, never mind the nice little chat and a warning they have openly declared there actions therefore should be prepared to take the consequences. A few high profile prosecutions will wake up the others i am sure. Allow the situation to continue and you have a festering sore!
@Snow - what a silly comment
No one has been been 'grassed up'
@ Simon
To clarify, Beresfords do not show the full address of a property.
Google Maps pick up from the postcode and when you click on Street View it brings up a property in that area, not that specific property.
Try it and see - that's why it says 'Address is approximate'!
EAT I'm disgusted, dont you know the old saying.,,
"No one likes a grass" ?
What purpose are you trying to serve naming agents who don't comply. You should be spending your efforts lobbying the legislators not embarrassing agents. Disgrace to the industry and I doubt you'll publish this.
@Simon Don't be a mug. Some clients have specific needs for very good reasons - you cant just ignore them as it 'does your swede in' - or any other vegetable for that matter
Oddly, the new EPC rules have had the reverse effect to that which was intended.
Under the old rules, every property website had a pretty EPC graph visible or an obvious link to one under the tab EPC.
Now, you have to hunt very hard to find where the agent has buried the 'First Page'. To comply with the Law , this document has to be attached and available - just as it would be in a filing cabinet in an office.
Trading Standards haven't started policing the old rules yet so I doubt those flouting the latest ones will lose much sleep.
I would rather the authorities focussed more on dishonesty and regulation than a document no one requests or wants.
Finally - on the Bushells Day Out in Brussels, the seat of European Power, we played 'Spot the EPC'. I record that the game was abandoned as it was fruitless - unlike the pink beer.
it does my swede in listening to all this bluster about touting and 'vulnerable' people. Many companies are whinging about the EPC giving away the address whilst quite happily quoting it on their brochures.
For example Beresfords on most of their properties have the full address on the Street View functionality on their website.
So its ok for that but wrong for EPC's ?
Look in the mirror 'Estate Agents Are Hypocrites'.
As no doubt one of the merry breed who happily rubbish estate agents at every opportunity, you still have the nerve to have a pop when they have genuine fears for vulnerable clients such as the elderly and infirm.
If you'd had an elderly relative attacked, robbed or conned as I have you might have a different view,
@Estate Agents are Hypocrites
No - the Law is a hypocrite
We have an elderly, vulnerable seller who was the victim of a crime and is terrified of strangers - legally we have to identify such people and treat them accordingly.
Adding her address to the World Wide Web would be insane. I will go to prison before I do so in this case - except I wont as NO ONE including Trading standards cares.
Marsh and Parson are a brand owned by a listed company of course, LSL, make an example of them., it will be a far more powerful message than the small agents, but have they got the teeth to do so?
@we do it right
We are also the only agent in our area who sem to be fully complying with the EPC regulations - most haven't even got the EPC attached with or without an address. Our Tradiing Standards Office have told us that they would not prosecute if an address was redacted unless they receive a directive from DCLG or the EPC was being used fraudulently i.e. was from a different address to the property to which it was attached. However they did say that if we redacted the address we could be prosecuted by another Local Authority if someone from outside our area saw the advert and complained!
We are going to raise a formal complaint with DCLG that our Local Authority is actively encouraging Agents to break the law.
Someone has got to get to grips with this issue to ensure a level playing field for all.
Thanks EAT, now have a list of Estate Agents committing criminal acts by redacting a legal document.
Trading standards have to react to individual complaints and when they are tenfold about a Company a picture will build up.
We are the only Estate agent in our town actually compling with regulations, are we right? are we wrong? the whole EOC thing is a total farce come on give us VERY CLEAR instructions please.