Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Any legal come back after receiving a false BER?

2

Comments

  • #32
    FlipperThePriest
    Subscribers Posts: 710 ✭✭✭FlipperThePriest


    ercork wrote: »
    To the OP, I emailed the guy who carried out the BER on a property I bought a few years earlier. He sent me on the .xml file which I was able to open up using the SEAI's DEAP software. Might be worth checking that. If his email isn't on the advisory report you can get it on the SEAI website by typing in the BER number.

    Is this any good to the home owner? It seems to be a software tool more geared toward the assessor. I've registered online on DEAP4 for a look around, my understanding is that it is now entirely web based, whereas before it was desktop based software? Looking online, I couldn't find any feature that accepts an xml file. I'm curious as I have requested an xml myself. Assessor says he'll send it when he gets consent from the client (home owner at the time of BER).


  • #33
    ercork
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 177 ✭✭ercork


    zippy84 wrote: »
    Is this any good to the home owner? It seems to be a software tool more geared toward the assessor. I've registered online on DEAP4 for a look around, my understanding is that it is now entirely web based, whereas before it was desktop based software? Looking online, I couldn't find any feature that accepts an xml file. I'm curious as I have requested an xml myself. Assessor says he'll send it when he gets consent from the client (home owner at the time of BER).

    I haven't used version 4 myself to be honest. Just version 3 which, as you say, is desktop based software. You can still download it and install it on your PC:

    https://www.seai.ie/energy-in-business/ber-assessor-support/deap/deap3-software/

    If you manage to get hold of the .xml file you can open it up in the software and see what choices the assessor used when doing the BER.


  • #34
    FlipperThePriest
    Subscribers Posts: 710 ✭✭✭FlipperThePriest


    ercork wrote: »
    I haven't used version 4 myself to be honest. Just version 3 which, as you say, is desktop based software. You can still download it and install it on your PC:

    https://www.seai.ie/energy-in-business/ber-assessor-support/deap/deap3-software/

    If you manage to get hold of the .xml file you can open it up in the software and see what choices the assessor used when doing the BER.

    Got looking at the xml file using the older software, pretty interesting. My guess is DEAP4 was no good to me as my BER was performed before its introduction. I think from now on everything will be kept online and you won't need to import files.

    The reason I was curious as I was in the middle of upgrading the attic insulation. The BER score of our oldish house was pretty poor but I knew it was a solid build for the era, just lacking some basic energy saving steps so had a good bit of scope to improve. The software indicates I can bring it from F to C3 / C2 (probably for about 2.5 - 3k) by finishing the insulation, upgrading the ancient oil boiler and adding heating controls and then simple things like even lack of hot water tank insulation and old lighting bringing the score down.


  • #35
    ArrBee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 845 ✭✭✭ArrBee


    So, I finally got around to digging out the report.

    The only questionable thing in it is where it says there is no chimney but we have a fireplace.
    So my question is...
    What is defined as a chimney for the BER?

    in my case the fireplace is an enclosed wood burner which takes in air from the room.


  • #36
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,973 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ArrBee wrote: »
    So, I finally got around to digging out the report.

    The only questionable thing in it is where it says there is no chimney but we have a fireplace.
    So my question is...
    What is defined as a chimney for the BER?

    in my case the fireplace is an enclosed wood burner which takes in air from the room.

    see post #9


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    ercork
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 177 ✭✭ercork


    Also in post #33 above, the link I inserted contains the DEAP manual. Section 2.1 of this gives a definition of what constitutes a chimney.


  • #38
    Metric Tensor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭Metric Tensor


    ArrBee wrote: »
    in my case the fireplace is an enclosed wood burner which takes in air from the room.


    Not a chimney then.


    In order to TRY to make BERs consistent across every dwelling in the country there are a LARGE number of mandatory assumptions and convetions. So even if you have the xml file - you won't know the conventions and required assumptions unless you learn the BER system top to bottom.


    For example: One of the choices is whether the pipework between the boiler and cylinder is insulated. If even a millimeter of the pipe is not visible to the assessor he or she must select uninsulated unless they are provided with certified pictures of the covered over area showing otherwise.


  • #39
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Whats a certified picture? How is it certified.


  • #40
    Metric Tensor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭Metric Tensor


    I probably made it sound more formal than necessary. Basically some way of proving it is a picture of the particular house in question and not a random insulated pipe somewhere else.

    The SEAI auditor will decide what is acceptable in the end if/when the BER is selected for audit. I'd imagine if the builder or supervising professional attached a letter confirming the picture was of the house in question the auditor would probably be satisfied. They might not accept the word of the owner.


  • #41
    vintagecosmos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 849 ✭✭✭vintagecosmos


    beauf wrote: »
    Whats a certified picture? How is it certified.

    When I was in Eastern Europe you could hire a Bailiff who would take photos printed with dates on them then bind then and stamp each photo. Pages would be sewed together with anti tamper thread. That would be your proof to the courts that a premises was occupied or damaged etc.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    ArrBee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 845 ✭✭✭ArrBee


    Metric Tensor wrote: »
    Not a chimney then.


    In order to TRY to make BERs consistent across every dwelling in the country there are a LARGE number of mandatory assumptions and convetions. So even if you have the xml file - you won't know the conventions and required assumptions unless you learn the BER system top to bottom.


    For example: One of the choices is whether the pipework between the boiler and cylinder is insulated. If even a millimeter of the pipe is not visible to the assessor he or she must select uninsulated unless they are provided with certified pictures of the covered over area showing otherwise.




    Thanks.

    I don't consider my fireplace to be either a stove or open fire, which is why I gave a description.
    The BER link seems overly complicated. My take away was that chimneys were chimneys except when they were chimneys, or not chimneys. lol

    For me, this is case closed.
    Even if the assessor marked the boiler to cylinder pipe work as insulated (resulting in an artificially high BER) I would consider this a limitation of the framework as there was insulation.... just really really bad insulation and the length of run probably doesn't come into it either.


  • #43
    Metric Tensor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭Metric Tensor


    ArrBee wrote: »
    the length of run probably doesn't come into it either.


    Correct. The boiler could be within 1m of the cylinder or it could be 50m away in a detached garage and all other things being equal the BER would have the same result.*


    The software is not advanced enough to know the difference and if it were it would require more time for the assessment and assessment costs would rise - which is not something those administering the scheme want.

    (*This is a little simplified because the software does ask questions about location of the central heating pump in a different section).


  • #44
    ercork
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 177 ✭✭ercork


    Does the presence or absence of insulation on the pipework between the boiler and cylinder have much on an impact on the BER? If you change this setting in the software from 'No' to 'Yes', by how many kWhr/yr is the final figure changed?


  • #45
    Metric Tensor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭Metric Tensor


    Not a huge effect. No insulation on the cylinder would be a much bigger deal.


  • #46
    drongadoir
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 12 ✭drongadoir


    ArrBee wrote: »
    After buying a house with a B rating (can't remember the exact level) I now have a very strong suspicion the rating was incorrectly high.

    I've discovered a series of issues with the original rating ranging from inaccurate findings, to possible BER framework issues which don't take some high impacting design problems into consideration.
    eg. under dimensioned boiler, uninsulated buried hot water pipes.


    If it can be proven (should be easy to do) that the BER should in fact be lower, is there any precedence to claiming a difference in house value from the person who carried out the original BER?

    I am in the same boat. Bought an A2 rated semi D house in Dublin. It was freezing. On a moderately cold winters night I might switch off the heating at 22:00 but by 23:30 Id need to put on a jumper again. If I was travelling the house might go to 8C or below.

    It took me a lot of research and conversations to begin to understand why this was the case. But I got the xml file and begin to try the DEAP Software. With self improvements I have been able to make the place warmer and see how it wasn't possibly an A2.
    The windy location, the dormer design made the errors in the assessment even worse. However I havent fully understood why there is such a mismatch. I don't know if the assessor broke the law or can be sued but it is incredibly frustrating.


  • #47
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,973 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    drongadoir wrote: »
    I am in the same boat. Bought an A2 rated semi D house in Dublin. It was freezing. On a moderately cold winters night I might switch off the heating at 22:00 but by 23:30 Id need to put on a jumper again. If I was travelling the house might go to 8C or below.

    It took me a lot of research and conversations to begin to understand why this was the case. But I got the xml file and begin to try the DEAP Software. With self improvements I have been able to make the place warmer and see how it wasn't possibly an A2.
    The windy location, the dormer design made the errors in the assessment even worse. However I havent fully understood why there is such a mismatch. I don't know if the assessor broke the law or can be sued but it is incredibly frustrating.

    Hi droung, sorry to hear your situation but i have to row in here.

    the BER assessor has absolutely no influence or impact on how your house is built. Dormer dwellings are notoriously badly constructed as the myriad of junctions makes air tightness and insulation continuity incredibly difficult.

    you need to be aiming your ire at the builder and the certifying architect / engineer. The assessor has a VERY strict set of rules they have to operate within to produce the cert, whereas the builder and certifying architect may have been a lot "looser" in their adherence to the rules they have to work within ie the building regulations.

    ill assume your house is a new build if its an A2 rated. so..... did it have an air tightness test carried out? if its within a new estate, then the regulations allow for a sporadic testing, rather than every unit tested. This is an error in the regs my opinion as it allows a developer to focus on one particular unit and apply those results to the rest of those types of units.

    im not saying the assessor didnt make any errors... just making the point that the assessment has no impact or, or is a reflection on, the workmanship that goes into the dwelling.


  • #48
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    .. and we are full circle.

    If you have to ignore the Ber when looking at properties. Its a pointless.


  • #49
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,973 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    beauf wrote: »
    .. and we are full circle.

    If you have to ignore the Ber when looking at properties. Its a pointless.

    you have to understand what purpose the BER serves in order determine whether its pointless or not.

    Its used to compare like with like.... even if the "like" is completely crap..... so comparing crap with crap is possible under the system..

    but comparing 'crap' workmanship with 'excellent' workmanship is not possible unless that information is upfront and forthcoming... which in the vast vast majority of cases, it isnt.


  • #50
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    ....... so comparing crap with crap is possible under the system.. ..

    Really isn't. A Ber tells you very little. As the above stories illustrate.


  • #51
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,973 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    beauf wrote: »
    Really isn't. A Ber tells you very little. As the above stories illustrate.

    i completely agree with you

    the problem is people expect it to tell them something its not designed for.

    i blame SEAI squarely for this, for selling it as something that it isnt.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    drongadoir
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 12 ✭drongadoir


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Hi droung, sorry to hear your situation but i have to row in here.

    the BER assessor has absolutely no influence or impact on how your house is built. Dormer dwellings are notoriously badly constructed as the myriad of junctions makes air tightness and insulation continuity incredibly difficult.

    you need to be aiming your ire at the builder and the certifying architect / engineer. The assessor has a VERY strict set of rules they have to operate within to produce the cert, whereas the builder and certifying architect may have been a lot "looser" in their adherence to the rules they have to work within ie the building regulations.

    ill assume your house is a new build if its an A2 rated. so..... did it have an air tightness test carried out? if its within a new estate, then the regulations allow for a sporadic testing, rather than every unit tested. This is an error in the regs my opinion as it allows a developer to focus on one particular unit and apply those results to the rest of those types of units.

    im not saying the assessor didnt make any errors... just making the point that the assessment has no impact or, or is a reflection on, the workmanship that goes into the dwelling.


    Fair enough. Thanks for the feedback. Sometimes BER assessors really arent to blame because not all houses are tested but sometimes I suspect they are. My house had a BER done according to the xml and an airtest (4.7 ACH at 50 Pa.).
    Examples of outright errors in the xml include i) reported LEDs when in reality there was no bulbs, ii) attic insulation only covered about 60% of the attic floor. I understand that the assessor cant see inside the dormer parts but surely he can inspect the attic, iii) not sure how a house with 4.7 ACH at 50 Pa can get to A2 so I am certain there is some other errors even bearing in mind that dormers are cold prone.


  • #53
    Metric Tensor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,727 ✭✭✭Metric Tensor


    The BER assumes the house is well built and then progresses with calculations from there.

    So if a house is built poorly the BER is worthless.

    This is not made clear to the general public.

    (Also - as the assessor is paid a very small amount, in a "race-to-the-bottom" market, it is not in the assessor's interest to look for, or comment on, building defects. Their only interest is to get in and out as quickly as possible whilst covering their arse in an audit situation.)


  • #54
    Del2005
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,183 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    drongadoir wrote: »
    Fair enough. Thanks for the feedback. Sometimes BER assessors really arent to blame because not all houses are tested but sometimes I suspect they are. My house had a BER done according to the xml and an airtest (4.7 ACH at 50 Pa.).
    Examples of outright errors in the xml include i) reported LEDs when in reality there was no bulbs, ii) attic insulation only covered about 60% of the attic floor. I understand that the assessor cant see inside the dormer parts but surely he can inspect the attic, iii) not sure how a house with 4.7 ACH at 50 Pa can get to A2 so I am certain there is some other errors even bearing in mind that dormers are cold prone.

    They can only look through the attic hatch they can't climb in unless it's got a proper access ladder, I'm sure that the builders are aware of this. As said it's the builders and architects gaming the system which is the problem not the assors.


  • #55
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,973 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    drongadoir wrote: »
    Fair enough. Thanks for the feedback. Sometimes BER assessors really arent to blame because not all houses are tested but sometimes I suspect they are. My house had a BER done according to the xml and an airtest (4.7 ACH at 50 Pa.).
    Examples of outright errors in the xml include i) reported LEDs when in reality there was no bulbs, ii) attic insulation only covered about 60% of the attic floor. I understand that the assessor cant see inside the dormer parts but surely he can inspect the attic, iii) not sure how a house with 4.7 ACH at 50 Pa can get to A2 so I am certain there is some other errors even bearing in mind that dormers are cold prone.

    whats the heating system? a heat pump?
    if so can you tell me what efficiency is given to the space and water heating?

    4.7 is poor and yes, it sounds off for a house to get a A2 rating with that air tightness

    the attic floor covering sounds a bit off alright.... did you measure exactly what percentage of attic floor isnt covered though?
    as its a dormer its unlikely the assessor climbed into the attic to check hidden areas.

    the LEDs make very little difference... and at the time of assessment whos to say there wasnt LEDs in the blubs? also, incandescents are on the way out so 100% LEDs would be a more correct application into the future.


  • #56
    ArrBee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 845 ✭✭✭ArrBee


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    i completely agree with you

    the problem is people expect it to tell them something its not designed for.

    i blame SEAI squarely for this, for selling it as something that it isnt.


    maybe a bit pedantic, but would well imagine that it is being sold as something that it "was supposed to be" but has failed in implementation - for multiple reasons.

    I don't see any practical purpose for the BER system that we have currently Even if it was marketed accurately.

    "here's a rating to indicate if the design/build of a house has had some thought put into it for minimizing energy use. But you're best to ignore it as it doesn't relate to actual energy use.."


  • #57
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,973 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ArrBee wrote: »
    I don't see any practical purpose for the BER system that we have currently Even if it was marketed accurately.
    "

    the practical purpose we have for is being, is to comply with this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_the_energy_performance_of_buildings

    maybe a bit pedantic, but would well imagine that it is being sold as something that it "was supposed to be" but has failed in implementation - for multiple reasons.

    what do you think it was "supposed to be" ?

    do you consider that what you think its supposed to be is not actually what it is?


  • #58
    ArrBee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 845 ✭✭✭ArrBee


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    the practical purpose we have for is being, is to comply with this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_the_energy_performance_of_buildings




    what do you think it was "supposed to be" ?

    do you consider that what you think its supposed to be is not actually what it is?


    I wouldn't call ticking a box a practical purpose.


    Seeing the link, it could well be that the sole purpose was to tick the box and comply with the EU directive. Makes sense.
    In which case it is being marketed as something that it's not. as you say.

    Of course, I do consider that what I think it is supposed to be is not what it actually is. That's what I am saying....


  • #59
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    A Building Energy Rating (BER) certificate indicates your building's energy performance. It is similar to the energy label for household appliances.

    ummmf


  • #60
    caesarthechimp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 204 ✭✭caesarthechimp


    Del2005 wrote: »
    They can only look through the attic hatch they can't climb in unless it's got a proper access ladder, I'm sure that the builders are aware of this.
    I would not agree with this.
    Its not too much to expect a BER assessor to buy a stepladder or a telescopic ladder and carry it around in case there is no "styra" installed.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    caesarthechimp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 204 ✭✭caesarthechimp


    ArrBee wrote: »
    ...Even if the assessor marked the boiler to cylinder pipe work as insulated (resulting in an artificially high BER) I would consider this a limitation of the framework as there was insulation.... just really really bad insulation and the length of run probably doesn't come into it either.
    You made this allegation a few times, but what is your basis for suggesting it?
    Look in your Advisory Report. If it says there something like...
    Hot Water Primary Circuit Losses
    Uncontrolled heat loss can also be reduced by installing insulation on hot water distribution pipework where heating is not required. This reduces the amount of heat required to be generated by the heating system, and so reduces the amount of fuel required. Ideally, this involves all pipework (flow and return) between the boiler and hot water cylinder being insulated (including in walls and floors).
    .. then the assessor has not marked it as insulated.


Advertisement