Consultation on Draft Energy Efficiency (Domestic Private Rented Property) (Scotland) Regulations – National Insulation Association response
Closing Date: 29 August 2025
Response submitted by: National Insulation Association
For more information, please contact: info@nia-uk.org
About the National Insulation Association
The National Insulation Association (NIA) represents the insulation industry in Scotland and across the UK with a member base comprised of installers, system certificate holders, and manufacturers who provide a wide range of insulation solutions for homes and buildings. The NIA and its members are fully committed to maintaining and raising standards within the insulation industry.
Do you agree that the PRS MEES should be Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) Heat Retention Rating (HRR) band C?
The NIA supports the proposal to have PRS MEES require improvements for private rented homes to reach EPC Band C. The 2023 Scottish House Condition Survey found that 48% of all PRS homes were within EPC band D or lower.1 It is of vital importance that homes reach band C or higher as this category is associated with several environmental and financial benefits for residents.
Renters living in homes with an EPC D-G are 73% more likely to experience damp and 89% more likely to experience excessive cold than those in homes EPC A-C.2 Furthermore, homes with an EPC D-G could save between £555 and £7,188 annually on energy costs by upgrading to an EPC C (depending on their current EPC band and property type).3 Making all private accommodation conform to EPC C requirements will not only improve thermal comfort and fabric performance but also deliver lower bills for the 44% of Scottish PRS households in fuel poverty and prevent exposure to damp and mould.4Aligning the standard for both private and social rental sector homes to EPC C is an appropriate measure.
1 The Scottish Government (2025) The Scottish House Condition Survey: 2023 Key Findings. Available here.
2 Citizens Advice (2023). Damp, cold and full of mould. Available here.
3 Rightmove (2025) What’s the average UK energy bill? Available here.
4 The Scottish Government (2025) The Scottish House Condition Survey: 2023 Key Findings. Available here.
Do you agree that only new reformed EPCs should be used as a basis for the proposed MEES?
The NIA agrees that new reformed EPCs should be used where possible for compliance with the new MEES. However, we believe that a property compliant with EPC Band C under current regulations should be recognised as compliant under the new standard. This will allow upgrades for the least energy-efficient PRS properties in EPC bands D-6 to be prioritised.
Furthermore, landlords would benefit from a defined transition period – possibly until the current EPC for their property expires – to make upgrades without risking non-compliance. Both measures will ensure clarity as the sector prepares for the new standard.
Do you agree that the backstop date for all PRS homes to comply with MEES should be 2033?
The NIA supports the proposed backstop date of 2033 for PRS compliance with the MEES. Whilst the MEES should be implemented as soon as possible to support home decarbonisation and tenant wellbeing, we recognise that supply chain constraints and upgrade costs for landlords necessitate a transition period. This will give landlords the appropriate amount of time to understand details of the new standard and make the upgrades to achieve a compliant EPC.
Do you agree that the MEES should apply to properties being let to new tenants from 2028?
The NIA supports the proposed timeline, but changes to the EPC metrics must be implemented sooner to support upgrades in PRS properties. The consultation indicates that new EPC metrics will not go live until Autumn 2026, leaving less than two years for landlords to achieve MEES compliance for their properties by 2028. Implementation of the EPC reform by the end of 2025 will enable landlords to prepare for upgrade costs or submit exemptions where necessary.
Nevertheless, we support the principle of a deadline for landlords taking on new tenants to achieve MEES compliance. This will encourage first-time landlords to achieve compliance before tenancies begin, thus protecting tenant wellbeing from the offset and avoiding the disruption of making upgrades whilst tenants are living in the property. This will also encourage current landlords to use the time where there are no tenants living in the property to make appropriate upgrades, ensuring that landlords do not delay taking action until nearer the 2033 backstop date.
Do you agree that, regardless of changes to the repairing standard, that crofters, small landholders and agricultural holdings should be excluded from PRS MEES?
No comment.
Do you agree that the regulations should exclude short-term holiday lets from the PRS MEES?
No comment.
Do you agree with the proposed exemptions covering consent, the fabric requirements of the home and temporary exemptions?
No comment.
Do you agree that Heat & Energy Efficiency Technical Suitability Assessment (HEETSA) should be available as an option to evidence potential negative impacts on the fabric of a property and to support an exemption?
Yes, the NIA agrees that a Heat and Energy Efficiency Technical Suitability Assessment (HEETSA) should be available as an option to evidence potential negative impacts on the fabric of a property and to support an exemption.
In our response to the Scottish Government’s HEETSA consultation, we highlighted the importance of including a thorough risk assessment within the HEETSA methodology. This should include a detailed technical suitability assessment to evaluate whether retrofit interventions are technically suitable for an individual property. It should also consider
potential barriers and risks to retrofit measures, such as the age and condition of the building, space constraints, and the protected status of the building (if applicable). Given that a HEETSA would evaluate these potential risks in much more detail than is currently done within an EPC assessment, we agree that it should be used to determine whether potential measures could have a negative impact on the structure or fabric of a building. If a HEETSA or other relevant assessment by a qualified professional deems that there is a high risk of such an issue occurring, then this could be used to support an exemption to MEES standards.
Do you agree that the cost cap level should be £10,000?
The NIA supports the implementation of a cost cap of £15,000. We believe that a higher cost cap level will ensure landlords can afford to make the appropriate upgrades. For landlords who own the 14% of PRS properties in current EPC bands E-G, this higher cost cap level would increase the likelihood of their properties reaching EPC Band C compliance.
Furthermore, lower EPC ratings correspond strongly to worse social outcomes, with 48% of households in properties within EPC Bands F or G being fuel-poor compared to 32% in properties rated EPC Band C or better.5 A higher ceiling on the maximum investments a landlord can make will support the most vulnerable tenants in the least energy-efficient properties.
5 The Scottish Government (2025) The Scottish House Condition Survey: 2023 Key Findings. Available here.
Do you agree with the proposed 12-month lead in time period for works to contribute to the total cost cap?
The NIA supports a longer, more realistic lead-in period of two years to enable landlords to be MEES-compliant. A lead-in time period for works to contribute to the total cost cap is an appropriate measure, as it would encourage landlords to invest in property upgrades quickly and ensure their tenants can receive the benefits of energy efficiency as soon as possible. However, the availability of skilled labour may pose a challenge to this timeline. The shortage of capacity in the energy efficiency supply chain will make the transition in the PRS sector much more difficult to achieve. As such, landlords should be given a more appropriate lead-in period of two years so they can achieve compliance amidst a challenging skills climate.
Do you agree that all actual costs, and the cost of an EPC, should count towards the cost cap?
The NIA believes that as much of the cost cap as possible should be reserved for the actual costs of efficiency upgrades made by landlords to achieve MEES compliance. Given that an EPC is necessary for landlords to know whether their property is compliant or not, it would be reasonable to include the EPC in the final cost cap. However, to minimise the opportunity for gaming, a maximum reflecting the upper range of average EPC assessment costs (e.g. £150) should be set for how much can be spent on an EPC assessment. Nevertheless, the need to include an EPC assessment in the cost cap would be reduced if landlords were required to comply with the new standard only when their existing EPC expires and not prior to that.
Do you agree that landlords should receive Scottish Government support to make the required changes?
The NIA supports landlord access to a broad range of low-cost green finance options to reduce financial risk and incentivise investment. This will support the delivery of MEES and enable the benefits to be captured for tenants and for the benefit of improving the housing stock for the future.
The NIA believes that affordability for landlords can be addressed by providing access to a range of low-cost green finance options, alongside appropriate grant support such as through Warmer Homes Scotland. This would mitigate the cost impact on landlords whilst ensuring fair outcomes for tenants. Without broad access to a range of green finance solutions there is a risk that landlords less able to afford the cost of a £15,000 investment sell on their properties to the private sector (owner occupiers). Other unintended consequences could be increased rents in certain areas due to reduced supply of properties on the rental market.
Under the right conditions, with access to a broad range of support, the decarbonisation of private rented housing stock is feasible given the greater abundance of private capital. It will be important to develop and market this to support the delivery of MEES and ensure landlords are aware of what support is available to them.
Do you agree that this should be in the form of a loan?
The NIA agrees with the proposal for support to be provided in the form of a loan to landlords particularly as there is an existing scheme providing similar retrofit focused support; the Private Rented Sector (PRS) Landlord Loan Scheme. This scheme offers considerable financial support with close to £40,000 available for single properties and up to £100,000 for up to 5 properties through an interest free loan. Access to support will encourage investment and deliver the desired outcomes of MEES.
Support can also be provided through other green finance solutions to help mitigate risk to landlords including:
– Green Mortgages
– Tax incentives and green allowances
– Green bonds and investment funds which could have the dual benefit of supporting local area delivery schemes benefiting multiple homes at once.
– Property-Linked finance, which ensures repayment even if the landlord sells their property.
– Energy Performance Contracting / ESCO Models, helping to reduce upfront costs for landlords.
Do you agree that Local Authorities should be responsible for monitoring and compliance of these regulations?
The NIA believes that Local Authorities should play a role in monitoring and compliance however, they have faced challenges due to limited funding and resource capacity meaning.6 Local Authorities may in some cases lack resource and technical expertise to do this effectively. This echoes the situation in England and Wales for MEES delivery.7
The best model for enforcement in part depends both on the delivery of financial support from Government and how landlords choose to invest. For example, where landlords receive funding from funding schemes such as the Private Rented Sector (PRS) Landlord Loan Scheme or Warm Homes Scotland, monitoring and compliance can be supported by the administrative teams delivering these schemes.
In the case that Local Authorities are responsible for monitoring and compliance with these regulations, the Government should ensure they are effectively supported with the additional finances and staffing required to deliver these functions. The importance of having a sufficiently resourced supply chain to support monitoring and compliance cannot be understated. With record investment in retrofit there is a need to address supply chain weaknesses to ensure the desired outcomes are realised.
Do you agree with the proposed level of financial penalties to support compliance with the regulations?
The NIA believes that the fine level should be, at a minimum, higher than the proposed cost cap of £10,000 to ensure landlords are not incentivised to be non-compliant. If the fines are lower than the cost cap, then landlords may feel it is less costly not to invest in their property.
Given that the aim of this policy is to raise the energy efficiency of private rented housing, the Government and Local Authorities (LAs) should focus on supporting landlords towards compliance and reserve fines for cases where landlords deliberately refuse to engage.
As highlighted previously in the response, LAs have faced longstanding issues of inadequate resourcing and technical expertise in the retrofit space. If they are to take on the responsibility of engaging with landlords to drive compliance, they must be given the necessary resources to do so effectively.
Do you agree that the Scottish Government should seek to amend the Energy Act 2011 to increase in maximum financial penalties that could be imposed up to £30,000 in future, should this be deemed necessary?
The NIA agrees that should there be a need to increase the maximum penalty, for example if non-compliance is taking place without recognised exemptions being registered, then an increase in the penalty should be considered. This must again be balanced with adequate financial support for landlords and sufficient resourcing to support monitoring and compliance efforts for LAs.
In what way could these regulations have a specific or different impact, positive or negative, on a particular group of people? This could be based on protected characteristics, such as age or disability, or geography, such as island communities.
No comment.
