Builders Green Advice Not Trusted
A new poll conducted by the Energy Saving Trust has found that 84 per cent of tradespeople want to give householders advice they can trust. But only one in six has confidence in tradespeople’s green guidance.
Just one in six British householders would trust a tradesperson’s green guidance but eight in 10 tradespeople would like to give energy efficiency advice that was respected by their customers, according to two polls from the Energy Saving Trust, the UK’s leading organisation set up to help people fight climate change.
The research was commissioned as part of the Energy Saving Trust’s Building in the Dark campaign which was launched on 2nd June 2009. The initiative aims to highlight the green skills gap among UK tradespeople, as well as campaign for new quality standards and training programmes for the housing sector on energy efficiency.
One poll – of 2362 people from across the UK – found that just 17 per cent would trust the advice of the tradesperson already doing work in their house, if they offered to install energy efficiency measures.
And more than half (56 per cent) would suspect that if a tradesperson doing a job on their house suggested energy efficiency measures for their home their motivation was to get extra work.
The second survey – of 241 UK tradespeople – found that 55 per cent of tradespeople would offer green advice if they had more information while more than eight in 10 (84 per cent) would like to be trusted by their customers to give energy efficiency advice.
More than two thirds (68 per cent) of tradespeople want clearer explanations of current environmental legislation while almost eight in 10 (78 per cent) need better guidance of changes in the pipeline for energy efficiency requirements.
Philip Sellwood, chief executive of the Energy Saving Trust, said: “If the national target of an 80 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050 is to be met it is vital we tackle the lack of energy efficiency in our existing housing stock. We simply must act now.
“Latest figures show that £23.9 billion is spent on repair, maintenance and improvement works on the UK housing stock and some of this work represents a missed opportunity to make green improvements.
“Real cost savings – in terms of labour and minimising disruption – are on offer to householders who employ tradespeople to install energy-efficiency measures when they are in doing other work. Householders can save on average £340 a year on energy bills through green improvements and energy efficient behaviours.
“We need new training schemes and quality marks for the housing sector to help householders identify skilled tradespeople with the expertise to make green improvements.
“Seventy-five per cent of people in the UK believe the best way to improve the energy efficiency of a home is when the builders are in, but until tradespeople have the knowledge, training and skills to be able to offer this expertise as second nature then they will be building in the dark.”
Brian Berry, director of external affairs at the Federation of Master Builders said: “There are already some entrepreneurial tradespeople out there and we are increasingly seeing businesses developing special services for householders who want greener and more energy efficient homes. We would like to this to become the norm rather than the exception but to increase the number of tradespeople offering energy efficient improvement works there needs to be greater demand from homeowners.
“One way to increase demand would be for the Government to cut VAT to five percent for property repairs thereby offering an incentive to have building work done. Coupling a VAT cut with more training for tradesmen should mean a real increase in energy efficient homes in the UK.”
Anthony Day from York recently renovated his Victorian Terrace house to make it more energy efficient. He said: “When I had builders in my home they did an excellent job, but some of the green measures were a first for them. We’re always looking to save money and carbon emissions and when you’re doing up your property and the builders are in, it is the perfect time for them to put in these additional green measures.
“Planning is the key. Do your homework so you know what’s possible in advance – and the best place to start is the Energy Saving Trust.”
The Energy Saving Trust Housing Programme works with housing professionals to achieve higher standards of energy efficiency in the UK housing market. The programme provides free technical guidance and solutions to help UK housing professionals design, build and refurbish to high levels of energy efficiency.
The Energy Saving Trust aims to enhance its Housing Programme by end 2009 to better help general builders and tradespeople.
The survey of 2362 UK consumers also found:
- Almost half (49 per cent) of respondents have never had a tradesperson recommend energy efficiency measures in their home.
- Respondents felt that of all the trades, electricians were the mostly likely to be able to offer the best advice on how to install green measures in their home.
The survey of 241 UK tradespeople also found:
- Plumbers are the most likely of all UK tradespeople to offer green advice to customers.
- More than eight in 10 (81 per cent) of plumbers would offer energy efficiency advice compared to just 27 per cent of carpenters.
- Electricians came in second at 73 per cent with conservatory installers at 62 per cent, builders at 56 per cent and roofing/loft conversion specialists at just under half (48 per cent).
If you are a householder who needs more information on how you can implement some home improvements contact your local Energy Saving Trust advice centre on 0800 512012 or visit the website at www.energysavingtrust.org.uk
Related posts:
I have just found this forum at an early hour after waking with my mind buzzing as to insurance. I think that the people of the modern world should start a campaign against gobbledygook. Each and every way we turn, so-called experts use ambiguous terms or evasion to avoid making a statement as to what they believe. Politicians are possibly the worse and, as a listener to radio four, it is easy to see the any politician interviewed is aware of the time limitations and filibusters his way through any interview without particularly saying anything.
In the south of England, some two years ago we experienced and earthquake. Damage was done and insurers rushed, in the main, to show how bona fide they were in settling claims. However, when it came to expert advice as to what was insurable and what was not, who was expert and who was not, it was not so transparent as insurance today seems not to be.
I had a friend whose house suffered and he had water coming in through his roof and did not know where and how. He contacted his insurers who sent out a “loss adjuster” who, because he could not see round the back of the chimney, which appeared to be the cause of the problem, suggested that a “roof inspection” was necessary. The loss adjuster took a photograph of the front of the chimney from the back of the house and left. When the builder came to undertake the “roof inspection” he came with a ladder but nothing to actually gain access to the roof and see and inspect the back of the chimney. He climbed his ladder to the height of the guttering and took another photograph from some fifteen foot closer than the loss adjuster. When my friend asked how he was going to inspect the rear of the chimney, he was told, “I have a very good camera”.It was not good enough to see round corners and his claim was not accepted on the spurious comments of a so-called expert.
As a mature man, I can remember a time when to take out insurance was just that. You took out a policy and were covered fairly comprehensively against the pitfalls that you envisaged. Today, you take out a policy and live in comparative fear as to whether it will pay out in the eventuality of an incident or accident but you do not have the degree of certainty that came with the insurance of yesterday.
Clever men with smart attitudes seem to point out the fact that you have failed to dot the i’s and cross the t’s therefore you cannot receive the support from the insurance companies that you aspired to when you took out the policy. The dubious concept of what constitutes a “claim” can mean that when you seek to renew your policy you could be rejected by any company other than the one you are with.
As an example, I contacted my home insurance as to whether my garden wall, which was being pushed over by the next door garden some two or three foot above the level of my own,was covered by insurance and was told that the wall was not covered. I accepted this and subsequently, shopped around for a renewal quote when my insurance was due for renewal.I was told by one company that I had a subsidence problem as detailed in my claim for my garden wall. This was after they declined to offer me a quote for my home insurance.
This left me in an invidious position. Each and every application for insurance cover has the same phrase somewhere within it. “have you been turned down for insurance cover from any other company”. It is not naive in this modern climate to be fairly sure that if you gave an answer in the positive, you would not get an offer of cover and if you suggested that you had never had a refusal, this could well come to light in the event of some tragedy occurring.
In this case, I had not made a “claim” as per the common understanding of the word, I had merely made and enquiry as to the extent of my cover. In the event, I was obliged to stay with my insurers who offered renewal as a matter of course and, presumably relied on the information that I had given them initially, prior to my having been deemed to have made a “claim” Despite their accepting and offering renewal, they had instituted the conditions of information that made me unacceptable to other companies. An enquiry had gone into the shared knowledge as a claim!
I know that this is not a particular example of “gobbledygook” but it is very much symptomatic of our time when I was placed in a position whereby any thing that I offered in comment to the insurers that declined to offer me insurance was ignored. The fact that I had made an enquiry was sufficient reason for them to decline to offer cover and the fact that they declined meant that all of the others would probably decline as well. Ultimately, I was a victim of gobbledygook in that a mere enquiry was sufficient to create a path that made me an insurance “risk”.
Is it time for consumers to get together and assess insurance companies and demand an end to the ambigous nature of much of what the tell us. What is a “loss adjuster” and what is his role. Is it to ease our loss and facilitate any claim that we might have to re
sort to, or is it to deny us our cover and reduce the possible loss to the insurers? I think, and my experience as a builder tell me that it is to amoeliarate the loss to the insurance company that is the prime role of the loss adjuster. A bit like the caricature of the builder with his pencil behind his ear who suggests, “Ah, that looks expensive”, the loss adjuster with his clipboard suggests,”Ah,I don’t think that we can cover that!”
If you employed a builder, you would want to know what experience he had of doing similar work to that which you required but how do you assess a “loss adjuster” when even his job description is ambigous? If he is qualified to assess the claim that you might make then he should be an engineer in the field of motoring, or maybe a car salesman! and a structural engineer in the case of damage to buildings.At least, we the people who pay for the insurance should know and be aware of what qualifies any person with the ability to either deny our claim or to accept it and be entitled to a full report as to the decision.