The short life of the "Insulation Failures Alliance"

-
This blog post is entirely based on publicly available information.

In an apparent 'road to Damascus conversion' Neil Marshall Chief Executive at National Insulation Association (NIA) set up a twitter account @cavityInsulat1 in late July 2019 and proceeded to express concern about mass failures in CWI. He claimed to be involving 'key stakeholders' and calling for a national survey of the the problem similar in scope to the NIHE report which I've previously summarised here.

Marshall initally presented himself as "CIEA"



I understand that he made contact and with installers, CIVALLI, BRE and government departments with the stated goal of creating an alliance to set standards for extraction of insulation. [cavity extraction is unregulated].

I don't think anyone ever took his efforts seriously as the 'association' changed names at least 3 times that I'm aware of - broadening in scope each time with the last moniker being "Insulation Failures Alliance".
Some of the people he had contacted and industry onlookers expresed concerns about this being another case of poacher turned game keeper which is a familiar template for those involved in retrofit. It's not uncommon for a failing CWI installer to rebrand as an extraction company to exploit this unfortunately growing and unregulated market.
All these concerns were rendered moot  On Friday 16th August 2019 all his tweets disappeared and finally the account deleted.

Although his linkedin pages suggests he still works for the NIA, I have not been able to confirm this. Either way as chief executive of the association which worked alongside CIGA in delivering 6 million installs this is a 360 turn from someone who has dismissed evidence from previous surveys which have hinted at the scale of the problems.

Daily Mail 21 January 2017 The great cavity wall calamity: 1.5 million homes are blighted by damp after cowboy builders cash in on a Government insulation drive


Given his job title and close connection with CIGA, I can only assume he would have privileged insight into the failings of the industry.

This blog puts emphasis on evidence rather than speculation, but it's certainly worth noting that the following post were made from the twitter account.


A rather alarming Tweet on 12/08/2019


If anyone has information on the claim that CIGA have lost a 'very significant number of guarantees' then I do think this needs to be public knowledge especially given the sheer number of homes apparently protected by a CIGA guarantee. (CIGA state 1 in 4 in their Annual report)

Under the same Twitter account but a different name "Cavity & solid wall insulation extraction assocaition"

How are CIGA and NIA  related?

The NIA predates the formation of CIGA and was originally known as the National Cavity Insulation association. Installers under ECO are typically members of NIA and issue 25 year guarantees via CIGA. I believe Ofgem requires ECO installers to be members of a trade association.

CIGA's website provides a good indication of the close ties of NIA and CIGA. It states that Tony Hardiman MBE was Chairman of NIA from 2005,  on the CIGA council since 2010 while also serving as the managing director and part owner of Dyson's Energy Services LTD one of the biggest installers.

Tony helpfully confirmed the identity of the Twitter poster here (screenshot below).



These days there seems to be more of a separation but historically NIA and CIGA (and SWIGA) shared many of the same directors and even shared the same office space as CIGA.

Historical tax filings on Company house list NIA's previoulsy registered office as  2 vimy Court with CIGA being 3 Vimy court. Very cosy!


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The controversy over Cavity Wall Insulation 'topups'

-
Image
In this article I talk about the practice and problems of topping up insulation when voids are discovered, why it is being done and the potential violations of building regulations. I can only put forwards what I have understood from public documents and personal correspondence  So I welcome corrections or clarifications from the industry on this important issue for home owners and will happily update this post to reflect any inaccurate statements. We know that 100s of topups are done every year.   From what I can gather : If the BBA have not approved these topups then the relevant local authority building control should have been notified prior to topping up as an 'off licence' use of the product.  It is not clear that the correct procedures are being followed in all cases. Background :Voids are common A void is simply an area cavity between the walls which is missing insulation.  If a void is large enough then the insulation will not be compliant with the meter square
Read more

Lintels, weep holes and render

-
Image
I found the notion of lintels in cavity trays difficult to visualise. The reason I'm looking into lintels is that there is a damp patch that runs along the lintel over the front door. Brick houses built today will have cavity trays and weep holes inserted into the design. You will spot weep holes these as either gaps in the mortar or where the mortar is replaced with a perforated plastic insert as below. CIGA state that no water should enter the cavity is properly maintained building. If that is so then why does building control mandate a cavity tray. Typical modern cavity tray with weep holes sitting on a steel lintel. The purpose of a cavity tray is to ensure moisture that gets in the cavity when driven through the mortar joints or other means is directed back to the outside wall and out of the building. If you didn't have a cavity tray or some sort of damp proof course then moisture would collect on the flat lintel and then flow off the sides of the lintel or soa
Read more

Discrepancies between Internal and external DPC (damp proof course)

-
Image
In a cavity wall construction, one would expect that the damp proof membrane to be at the same level on both walls. It turns out this is not always the case and my house is a good example where the internal wall's DPC is more than a brick lower than the external wall DPC. I didn't even think to check this before reading the CIGA Technical note 14 . This clearly states that if the distance between DPC and ground level is within a brick (as was the case with my property at time of install) then 'numerous other factors' must be assessed before declaring the dwelling as being suitable for CWI. CIGA  Technical note 14 . One of the factors is the relative level of the inner and outer leaf DPC. This is exactly what I found in my property. Ive used a floorboard to show the position of the internal floor. The DPC is clearly a brick below the floorboard and less than brick above the block paving. External leaf DPC is 1 brick below the floor level.
Read more