DEAP/BER Issues (Merged)

baguio wrote: »

Does this apply for existing registered (new build) assessors also? If so, is there not an inconsistency here?
Even though the New and existing build certification is being phased in, surely its unfair to lay down this requirement half way through what is the same process?
Nobody would have had any problem with this, had it been implemented from day1 - but that is not the case here.

There is an inconsistency but personally I think the SEI have realised that having no qualification requirement for assessors for new build was a big mistake and it could result in a low standard of assessment and render the BER process worthless. I too would like to see the assessment for the "A" rated homes!! the SEI's own information suggests that a passive house would achieve an A2 rating so an A3 would be pretty good and close to passive too!!

baguio

No6 wrote: »

There is an inconsistency but personally I think the SEI have realised that having no qualification requirement for assessors for new build was a big mistake and it could result in a low standard of assessment

Thats fair enough. However, some people invested time and money in the process at the initial stage. It is absolutely ridiculous if I can remain a 'registered ber assessor for new build' - and not for existing build. In reality, it should be the other way round (or of course, they should have insisted on this standard from the start and that would have been fine). I deliberately - and quite quickly - backed out of offering a service for new build. Reason being, I will NOT offer a substandard service (regardless of what i get involved in) - and given the pathetic standard of the initial courses (perhaps they improved), it left me in no position to offer customers a professional service. Without industry experience (never mind a construction studies course under the belt), I cannot see how anyone could offer a proper service.
Furthermore, they couldnt even assist me in getting their buggy software working on my xp (as in what the majority of the planets population still use) pc.
I am a HER qualified assessor for existing build from a few years back. The ironic thing is that there is much less need for previous qualifications when assessing existing build. I would say that whichever assessors pay the most attention to detail will get the most accurate results.
I don't think its outside the realms of possibility that SEI are in a claims situation here.

splurge

Not meaning to rain on anyone's BER qualifications, but below is an extract from the SEI website which states the necessary prequalifications to get on a BER assessor training course.

What are the Pre-qualifications to Get on a BER Assessor Training Course for New Dwellings?

The minimum prequalification requirement set in the Specification for Assessor Training Programmes for Building Energy Rating (BER) of New Dwellings is a National Certificate Level 6 Advanced Certificate/Higher Certificate in construction studies or other cognate discipline or equivalent. Equivalence may be determined as a combination of an appropriate construction-related qualification and significant relevant experience.
Training providers can set higher prequalification requirements for entry on to their courses.

It was always my understanding that formal qualifications were and are required - If there are a large number of registered assessors who have no formal qualifications I think this is a matter which should be addressed and rectified between the SEI and the training providers and that the 'Registered Assessors with no formal prequalifications should be struck off the register. I don't believe they could possibly competantly provide the necessary technical background required to accurately prepare and complete a BER assessment of a dwelling either new or existing.

I also believe the course providers should be seriously reprimanded by the SEI for permitting such people to participate in the course in the first instance.

baguio

splurge wrote: »

It was always my understanding that formal qualifications were and are required

That was your understanding. The reality is clearly quite different. For the first 50 assessors, their suitability was determined following an interview with the SEI appointed trainer.

splurge wrote: »

If there are a large number of registered assessors who have no formal qualifications I think this is a matter which should be addressed and rectified between the SEI and the training providers and that the 'Registered Assessors with no formal prequalifications should be struck off the register.

Given the point I made above, do you consider that a fair course of action to take?? - because I certainly don't!

splurge wrote: »

I don't believe they could possibly competantly provide the necessary technical background required to accurately prepare and complete a BER assessment of a dwelling either new or existing.

Given the 'training' offered for the initial New build assessment, I agree. It was the main reason I immmediately withdrew my services without having dissappointed any customers. (And if I hadnt done it for this reason, there were a couple of others that would have resulted in me withdrawing participation).
With regard to existing build, I disagree. As previously stated, I carried out the HER training in the UK for existing buildings. The version that SEI will be launching is unlikely to be much different. Given my experience, I don't think that any formal background qualification (whilst it would be beneficial) - is required. As stated in my previous post, the BER Assessor for exisiting build who allocates the time necessary to carry out a detailed survey - and who pays attention to detail - will provide the most accurate assessment.

splurge wrote: »

I also believe the course providers should be seriously reprimanded by the SEI for permitting such people to participate in the course in the first instance.

I think you'll find that negligence does not soley rest with the service providers. On reflection, I think you'll find that the bulk of it lies with the authority responsible for this whole scheme.

As stated in my previous post, nobody would have had any issue if it was clear from day one that previous construction related formal qualifcations were a prerequisite. However, that is not the case.
I can tell you that as a matter of principal, IF I am prevented from participating in the second phase of this scheme on this basis, I will be pursueing those responsible for costs at the very least.

splurge

I dont think 'fair' comes into it. The educational requirements were clearly advertised for all to see before they participated in a training programme.

Despite your passing a course that you undertook, It should be necessary to prove to the SEI that the the minimum standards of the level of prior education required have ben obtained prior to registration as a BER assessor.

What isn't 'fair' is that the suitably qualified BER assessors are left competing with the milkman, the postman, the breadman and the candle stick maker to provide what is inteded to be a professional technically competent assessment of the energy performance of a dwelling - the result of which is intended to be used by purchasers of to assist them in deciding which house to buy.

I cannot see how responsibility lies with the SEI other than they initially registered unsuitable people - a decision I hope is reversed and I suspect will be rectified with the not so distant future - The prequalifications were made clear to all from the start - maybe you didnt read the material on the SEI website - the course providers should ensure that the participants are suitably qualified.

baguio

splurge wrote: »

I dont think 'fair' comes into it. The educational requirements were clearly advertised for all to see before they participated in a training programme.

Sorry, but your wrong. This was added at a later stage. This was NOT the criteria when the initial (and by initial, I mean the first two courses) courses were put in place.
As I said, I (or anyone else for that matter) would have had no problem if this WAS set out as a prerequiste at the VERY start.

splurge wrote: »

Despite your passing a course that you undertook, It should be necessary to prove to the SEI that the the minimum standards of the level of prior education required have ben obtained prior to registration as a BER assessor.

Suitability had to be established prior to that course and registration. This parameter was established by SEI in conjunction with the service provider they used at that initial stage.

splurge wrote: »

What isn't 'fair' is that the suitably qualified BER assessors are left competing with the milkman, the postman, the breadman and the candle stick maker to provide what is inteded to be a professional technically competent assessment of the energy performance of a dwelling

Now we are getting to the heart of your concerns are we not
As I outlined earlier, I agree when it comes to 'New Build'. However, I would contend that as it stands right now, I am amongst a handful of people who have had any training on assessment of existing build - probably even yourself? Furthermore, fact is that there is a wealth of knowledge - from those who have had a hands on role in the house building trade - who are clearly well capable (with a good intensive course under their belts) of carrying out accurate assessments. In fact, in comparison with someone holding a piece of paper and NO industry experience, I would say they are MORE qualified.

splurge wrote: »

I cannot see how responsibility lies with the SEI other than they initially registered unsuitable people - a decision I hope is reversed and I suspect will be rectified with the not so distant future - The prequalifications were made clear to all from the start - maybe you didnt read the material on the SEI website - the course providers should ensure that the participants are suitably qualified.

But of course responsibility lies with the SEI. And your gripe outlined above should be addressed at them too - not other people who were only working within the guidelines/process that had been established by the SEI.

splurge

I was one of the first group of people that were trained - we had to submit our previous educational qualifications prior to being accepted on the courses.
The minimum educational requirements were in place from the beginnning, I am sure the SEI will be glad to verify this.
Naturally I am concerned about the overall reputation of the building energy rating industry and its credibility when people who do not have adequate academic qualifications are providing a service that the SEI says can only be provided by people with specific academic qualifications.
I feel that Mr. Joe Public will be badly served by this arrangement to the detriment of the entire industry.
Regarding hands on experience in addition to academic qualifications I couldnt agree with you more particularly when I personally have in excess of 15 years experience in designing, detailing, surveying, specification writing, site supervision, energy auditing existing and new residential buildings.

splurge wrote: »

What are the Pre-qualifications to Get on a BER Assessor Training Course for New Dwellings?

The minimum prequalification requirement set in the Specification for Assessor Training Programmes for Building Energy Rating (BER) of New Dwellings is a National Certificate Level 6 Advanced Certificate/Higher Certificate in construction studies or other cognate discipline or equivalent. Equivalence may be determined as a combination of an appropriate construction-related qualification and significant relevant experience.
Training providers can set higher prequalification requirements for entry on to their courses.

My two cents

Sei have set out the prerequirements for training as a ber assessor see above

If the training providers do not adhere to this it is up to them however when you go to register as a ber assessor SEI will have the right to refuse underqualified people at this stage. The training providers can offer the course as a stand alone fetac course if they choose to.

So Buyer beware Dont do the corse if you have not got the ability to do the work.

By the way SEI are introducing their own exam for BER registration.

splurge wrote: »

I was one of the first group of people that were trained - we had to submit our previous educational qualifications prior to being accepted on the courses.
The minimum educational requirements were in place from the beginnning, I am sure the SEI will be glad to verify this.
Naturally I am concerned about the overall reputation of the building energy rating industry and its credibility when people who do not have adequate academic qualifications are providing a service that the SEI says can only be provided by people with specific academic qualifications.
I feel that Mr. Joe Public will be badly served by this arrangement to the detriment of the entire industry.
Regarding hands on experience in addition to academic qualifications I couldnt agree with you more particularly when I personally have in excess of 15 years experience in designing, detailing, surveying, specification writing, site supervision, energy auditing existing and new residential buildings.

I was also one of the first and thought the same.
I started my course and as we introduced ourselves there was an electronic engineer on the course. When i asked what building experience/Knowladge he had. None was the reply. Clearly he wasnt appropriate. There was also plumbers on the course they had specific knowladge in certain aspects of the task but found other areas difficult. I can see the advantage for them to do this course.

Just got an information leflet from wicklow CoCo in relation to my clients responsibilities in relation to BER. Has anyone else recieved same from other local authorities?
Maybee things will start moving

topcatcbr wrote: »

Just got an information leflet from wicklow CoCo in relation to my clients responsibilities in relation to BER. Has anyone else recieved same from other local authorities?
Maybee things will start moving

or alternatively nothing will ever happen with BER again!!

im going to stand up for SEI here.

Its the 10th June and already i know of at least two trainers who are offering courses on the 'existing dwellings' issue. Prices vary between 595 and 550.... not bad IMHO... as i can see BERs for existing dwellings costs circa €600.. therefore i done and costs covered. The registration is simply €100 which will renew your 'new dwelling' registration for another year as well...good deal....

The courses are set to begin in september... 2 days.... and then sit an SEI exam in order to get registered... Thats plenty of time to be on the list before 1st jan 2009....

I do think however that they have sacrificed the 'new dwellings' BER in favour of the 'existing'.... all advertising is aimed at renters or buyers.... and its also easier to police as the agents are legally responsible. The 'new dwellings' have suffered as they made the clients legally responsible, and then they didnt make any attempt to educate them. Its been in place since 1st jan 07 yet a year and a half later theres still no requirement from solicitors to have BERs in place as part of the certification process...!!!!

holdfast

The guys on the project for insulation of exisitng houses in tipp will get the course for free and it will be ran this month as far as i know. lucky them

holdfast wrote: »

The guys on the project for insulation of exisitng houses in tipp will get the course for free and it will be ran this month as far as i know. lucky them

Im on this, Mon 16th & Tue 17th.

holdfast wrote: »

The guys on the project for insulation of exisitng houses in tipp will get the course for free and it will be ran this month as far as i know. lucky them

Im not sure if it will be sufficient for Existing Dwelling BER as it is being called HER Home Energy Rating. SEI havnt clarified this as yet.

topcatcbr wrote: »

Im not sure if it will be sufficient for Existing Dwelling BER as it is being called HER Home Energy Rating. SEI havnt clarified this as yet.

I got the definate impression from the tender doccumentation send to me that it wasn't sufficent!!

dewsbury

Hi All,
I have read most of the posts in this thread and realise that the following is not dissimiliar to some of the contributions.

I am looking for a new part-time or full-time career.
I have a strong background in computer systems.
I have also managed the renovation of perhaps 15 properties over the last 15 years. I have an interest in energy efficiencies but no great expertise.

I am looking to train as a BER.
(Specifically, I have a contact who would guarantee me a certain number of apartments in Dublin to inspect on an ongoing basis).

QUESTION: How do I gain sufficient knowledge to be competent to attend a BER course (and get 70% plus).

Any other views?

topcatcbr wrote: »

Im not sure if it will be sufficient for Existing Dwelling BER as it is being called HER Home Energy Rating. SEI havnt clarified this as yet.

they certainly have clarified this on the FAQ document they emailed to all prospective tenderers...

That course is a Home Energy Surveyor course, it is NOT a BER course, and anyone who completes it will not be qualified in 'existing Ber'.

sydthebeat wrote: »

they certainly have clarified this on the FAQ document they emailed to all prospective tenderers...

That course is a Home Energy Surveyor course, it is NOT a BER course, and anyone who completes it will not be qualified in 'existing Ber'.

Yes i got that also

However when i rang up to see if it would be suffecient to sit the exam for BER Existing Dwellings it was implied this could be the case but as the exam and framework for existing Dwellings has not yet been finalised they couldnt confirm this.

No definate answer.

topcatcbr wrote: »

Yes i got that also

However when i rang up to see if it would be suffecient to sit the exam for BER Existing Dwellings it was implied this could be the case but as the exam and framework for existing Dwellings has not yet been finalised they couldnt confirm this.

No definate answer.

When i rang they told me that the HES methodology is different from the Existing BER methodology. This 'existing' methodology must be confirmed at the moment because trainers are offering courses on it.

If it is the case that its sufficient, then good on anyone who does it (the HES), because the money they were offering wouldnt have made it worth my while... i say it would be only worth the while of an assessor located in the centre of these HES locations....

sydthebeat wrote: »

When i rang they told me that the HES methodology is different from the Existing BER methodology. This 'existing' methodology must be confirmed at the moment because trainers are offering courses on it.

If it is the case that its sufficient, then good on anyone who does it (the HES), because the money they were offering wouldnt have made it worth my while... i say it would be only worth the while of an assessor located in the centre of these HES locations....

The tender doc i got asked me to bid on an hourly rate allowing 4 hrs for each dwelling to include your travell time but excluding vat.

I did so giving what i thought was a fair rate.
they didnt offer anything.

Chimpster

topcatcbr wrote: »

The tender doc i got asked me to bid on an hourly rate allowing 4 hrs for each dwelling to include your travell time but excluding vat.

I did so giving what i thought was a fair rate.
they didnt offer anything.

Regarding the Home Pilot Insulation Scheme...

I sat down and worked out what I thought was a fair rate; my accountant was involved in this work also. I submitted my application. I have all the necessary qualifications and relevant experience so I was pretty confident on getting on the initial panel.

I missed out on the initial panel, as my costs were 'too high' I was told. I questioned SEI on this and I was basically told that my prices were off the marks to what was expected. Personally I think that some assessors have not priced this work correctly and to be honest it would not be worth doing the work at the prices that we being suggested.

The danger is that the scheme will run into problems if the pricing is wrong.

That’s my two pennies worth!

topcatcbr wrote: »

The tender doc i got asked me to bid on an hourly rate allowing 4 hrs for each dwelling to include your travell time but excluding vat.

I did so giving what i thought was a fair rate.
they didnt offer anything.

yes... my bad.

what i meant was that the price i had worked out was unrealistic, because i was able to contact a guy i knew located closer to the area (tipp in this case) and he was way under my price...

So is the whole BER thing becomming a race to the bottom?? I believe you do not have to do a trainingcourse to sit the SEI exam for existing building, they're being agressively marketed at the moment to fill them up but are they really necessary???

No6 wrote: »

So is the whole BER thing becomming a race to the bottom?? I believe you do not have to do a trainingcourse to sit the SEI exam for existing building, they're being agressively marketed at the moment to fill them up but are they really necessary???

why do you believe so, please?

I have an issue also that the courses are being agressively marketed, yet the is no set date to sit the SEI exam....

so are we supposed to do a training course in september, and may wait till january to sit an exam on it???

Syd

Have a look at the emails you are being sent!! theres a little note somewhere at the bottom. I suspect when the training requirement ? SEI exam sylabus is availalbe publicly some of us may find that he course is not necessary and some may find that it is, depending on you previous qualifications.I have already suggested to on training provider that they tailor a course for Architectural Technicians after all we don't really need to be taught how to measure a building or do we?? I would suggest that you wait and see whats becomes available the training providers are only designing the courses yet and the less interest we show the cheaper they will be!! just look at the New build courses.

No6 wrote: »

Syd

Have a look at the emails you are being sent!! theres a little note somewhere at the bottom. I suspect when the training requirement ? SEI exam sylabus is availalbe publicly some of us may find that he course is not necessary and some may find that it is, depending on you previous qualifications.I have already suggested to on training provider that they tailor a course for Architectural Technicians after all we don't really need to be taught how to measure a building or do we?? I would suggest that you wait and see whats becomes available the training providers are only designing the courses yet and the less interest we show the cheaper they will be!! just look at the New build courses.

I agree completly. Started the course for HER today and was told that it was based on the same criteria as the proposed existing dwellings and uses appendix s which will be part of the deap calculations. they are also producing a new programme for deap which will be issued in sept everything going well.

No6 wrote: »

Syd

I have already suggested to on training provider that they tailor a course for Architectural Technicians after all we don't really need to be taught how to measure a building or do we??

If we had a represitive body we might be in a position to demand this.

we surveyed a couple of houses today and it was more than obvious who was used to doing this kind of work and who wasnt.

elocin

topcatcbr wrote: »

If we had a represitive body we might be in a position to demand this.

we surveyed a couple of houses today and it was more than obvious who was used to doing this kind of work and who wasnt.

Hi Topcat,
TIA. For those of us who were not successful with our tenders, can you keep us updated on the course detail, such as what the SEI are emphasising in the survey, is it their plan to roll the scheme out to the rest of the country and if so when.