As one at the ‘coal face’ of this industry, I fear an increase in charges that will obviously arise as a result of these fees being passed on to us Assessors.

We already have downward pressure on fees we are able to charge thanks to so called “market forces” born out of stupidly weak business acumen, against a rising tide of charges on the otherside of the seesaw with accreditations, lodgements, software licensing and transportation. Strikes me the onyl ones paying a carbon tax is the very Assessor’s meant to applying skills and knowledge to assisting Clients in offsetting or reducing carbon emissions from the building stock!

Increased charges as proposed will without doubt be passed on to us and prompt one of three things…leaving the industry, bancruptcy or forced to use the free iSBEM ORcalc tools which are woefully inadequate…until of course the Government decide to levy charges for this software too!

I said this back in 2006 when I can into this sector…carbon was going to be the new gold and how right I was…Council tax linked to energy performance ratings for buildings is probably also on the cards sitting on a Civil Servants desk somewhere ready to knock us all sideways when incentives like RHI, FIT and Green Deal have been spent!

The old three phased approach…measure, incetivise and tax!!

Best Jan

Dear Sirs,

I would be interested to hear your justification for the eye wateringly excessive fee charges proposed for software validation on SBEM interface to the commercial suppliers other than that it would seem to constitute lining your coffers with a handy stealth tax which will once again end up costing the ordinary working person and tax payer.

As a very small practice our use of professional software packages such as IES or Bentley means that we can provide clients with a low cost, competitive, considered and professional means of achieving genuine Low Carbon Buildings with the added value of determining accurate systems options and passive design solutions.

Unfortunately the free issue iSBEM often results in a tick box exercise which shows little regard for anything other than providing the cheapest price for the certificate as a grudge purchase. As it stands we find ourselves as Chartered Engineers competing with ex florists and taxi drivers who provide cheap EPC’s with “guaranteed” results, many of which are not worth the paper they are written on. This proposed stealth tax can only make this situation infinitely worse and be ultimately damaging to our Low Carbon economy and will drive practices such as ours whom I see as providing an invaluable contribution out of business.

I cannot believe that this is your intention and would appreciate your response soonest. This together with a suspension of this action pending further consideration which could potentially see you back pedalling in a similar embarrassing manner to the recent FIT fiasco.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Plus, you can find studies that show that green buildings have higher resale values, higher occupancy rates, lower tenant costs, higher lease rates, and are easier to sell and rent.

It’s no wonder that green building is so popular.
Bob

I’d like to see more pressure from governments to make live music more sustainable as the skeptic inside me can’t help but feel it’s a PR exercise, something Black Eyed Peas, Radiohead and Dave Matthews would all be experts at.