The difference using actual values vs default values makes to an EPC rating l HollenPlus

Case Study: The 25-Point EPC Gap

Case Study: The 25-Point EPC Gap

Introduction

We often have clients come to us, unhappy with a poor EPC rating they have received from another company. When we investigate, in the vast majority of cases, the issue is caused by the original assessor using default values, rather than actual values.

To demonstrate the importance of doing a proper job, investing some time and effort to find and use actual values in the EPC modelling, we have produced a case study to show the difference using default values rather than actual values causes.

This case study is for a real office EPC HollenPlus undertook, and demonstrates the impact of using default values rather than actual values in an EPC assessment. We modelled the same building twice:

  • Once using default values

  • Once using the actual values we recorded, observed and/or researched during a detailed site inspection

The Result

A 25 point (entire EPC band) improvement by using actual values over default values.

Default Values Scenario - D78

Actual Values Scenario - C53

The Building

50,000 sq. ft. office building

  • 2007 construction

  • Brick and metal curtain wall construction

  • Flat metal-clad roof

  • Original double-glazed curtain glazing

Nothing unusual, very typical of UK commercial stock built at this time.

Default Values Result

Using default values, the building scored D78, a result that closely matched a previous EPC issued by another assessor.

Whilst that score was technically compliant, it didn't accurately or fairly reflect the actual efficiencies of the buildings systems, and therefore didn’t achieve a good result for the client.

If the D78 rating was lodged, the client would have to undertake far greater building upgrades to reach an EPC B target for example.

Actual Values Result

We then rebuilt the energy model using observed, verified data from our on-site inspection. We included:

  • Actual heating efficiency

  • Actual cooling efficiency

  • Actual lighting specifications and controls

  • Hot water efficiency

The EPC improved from D78 to C53:

That’s a 25-point gain, an entire EPC band higher, without any physical upgrades to the building.

This change wasn’t achieved through capital works or retrofits. It was achieved using our professional, accurate, best-in-class approach. The same approach we use for every project.

Why It Matters

An inaccurate EPC can lead to:

  • Unnecessary capex

  • Damage to returns

  • Misguided upgrade strategies

  • Lower asset value and marketing appeal

  • Increased tenant disruption

The HollenPlus Approach

At HollenPlus, we take the time to find as much actual data as possible, rather than relying on defaults.

When time is taken to properly inspect a building and input real, verified data, the true performance is revealed, and that often means better outcomes for owners, investors, and occupiers alike.

If your building has an EPC that doesn’t reflect recent upgrades, or just feels lower than it should be, we would be happy discuss and provide an expert opinion.

Let us maximise your EPC rating and minimise your upgrade costs.

Previous
Previous

How to Lower Commercial EPC Upgrade Costs via Planned Maintenance l HollenPlus

Next
Next

Be Pro-active. Get rewarded. 6 Benefits of Early EPC Upgrades for Commercial Property | HollenPlus