Who thought the Green Home Grants were a good idea?

-


In the first few months after launch The Green Home grants received plenty of flack from consumers who struggled to find installers willing to do the work and many expressed frustration at the bizarre primary and secondary measures .  Long before this many in the Trusmark fold were already expressing concerns.

Many are concerned that the Green Home grants is just more of the same as previous schemes: Mass insulation as a single measure with little attention to the 'Whole house' approach recommended by Each home counts review.

The PCA were a founding member of Trustmark. Their CEO Steve Hodgson in his 'Hodgson view' blog was blunt.




Elmhurst Energy are a Trustmark scheme provider and partnered with Trustmark on PAS2035 described it as a missed opportunity and were critical of step backwards by going back on the recommendations of the Bonfield Review (Each home counts).



Stroma a Trustmark scheme provider expressed dissapoinment about abandoning the trajectory already in place with ECO to transition to PAS2035.

Though many house holds might be grateful for free or subsidised insulation the established problems and consumer protections for insulation have not been addressed and sticking a Trustmark logo 'government endorsed quality' on the website adds little and in fact could be very misleading as the government do not help out homes who have had failed or bodged insulation. 

If the scheme is a disaster and dents consumer confidence then it could really impact well thought out schemes in the future.

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