@toodles, for company you should gone with "The Toodles".

@editor 😃

Signed

Yup, signed.

Signed.

Signed

Thishas just been released by Government

MCS will become the sole certification scheme for

Boiler Upgrade Scheme;
• Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund;
• Warm Homes: Local Grant;
• Energy Company Obligation 4 (ECO4)

There is reference to a wider review of the consumer protection landscape and acknowledgement of concerns expressed about MCS, but this doesnt appear to have affected the outcome

Not sure where this leaves flexi-orb

The response says

"However, to mitigate the potential risks we are taking steps to increase oversight of MCS. This includes placing a DESNZ observer on the MCS Service Company decision-making board and putting in place a memorandum of understanding between the department and MCS. The MCS Consumer Protection Oversight Panel will also publish an annual report on their consumer protection performance. We will keep this arrangement under review, and consider if further measures are needed to ensure adequate oversight."

Yes, I’ve had a read of the Government response and their decision to go ahead with MCS as the sole certification scheme is despite them noting the concerns about monopolies and despite an overwhelming majority of respondents arguing against just using one scheme.

As I expected, the decision to go ahead ignored the input from the general public. If they’re going to ignore us, why ask us in the first place? Why not be honest and say “We do not value your opinion and won’t listen”?

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

As I expected, the decision to go ahead ignored the input from the general public. If they’re going to ignore us, why ask us in the first place? Why not be honest and say “We do not value your opinion and won’t listen”?

Most likely because they have a legal duty to consult and to consider responses, but not to follow them.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

As I expected, the decision to go ahead ignored the input from the general public. If they’re going to ignore us, why ask us in the first place? Why not be honest and say “We do not value your opinion and won’t listen”?

Most likely because they have a legal duty to consult and to consider responses, but not to follow them.

Oh, I understand they don’t HAVE to follow the comments but surely going against that weight of opinion makes it difficult to claim the exercise actually constituted “considering”.

I wonder if an FOI request would elicit the meeting minutes…

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

I wonder if an FOI request would elicit the meeting minutes…

 

Thats a thought.  There is a contact point given.

Having experienced making FOI requests on my LPA in relation to heat pumps there is a pretty wide ranging get out because these are handled under EIR not FOI.  I suspect this get out will be used.

I must say I'm very disappointed by this decision. I have not yet read or processed the document. I'll reserve that as light bedtime reading in the next hour or so.