1. A picture is worth a thousand words - the installation reports should include photographs of the most important quality-related aspects of the installation, to provide a record to both the homeowner and MCS that the essential parts of the installation have been done correctly. Particularly important for work which is subsequently covered up by other materials/equipment and otherwise goes unseen.

2. Standardised forms should be simple to provide, just mandate a default proforma to be used. It's already standard practice with other standards and expand that form to include some amount of step-by-step calculation of any assumptions / values used in the design, so it can be clearly understood and checked how the design was determined. Such an approach is also likely to ensure better designs, as it ensure the essential design aspects must have been properly considered.

3. I wonder if there's a new type of role, particularly for the higher value/complex jobs, for a customer's expert representative or quality inspector, who acts on the customer's behalf to check the installers design and then inspect the installation. Like a professional MCS inspector, paid by the customer to act as their expert representative. 

Yes, and by the looks of it, much of the paperwork is not even standardised. How complicated would it have been to mandate a single reusable heat loss survey format? But of course, that would enable consumers to be more protected.. 

MCS need to focus on what their web site says it does, namely ensuring customers are protected and  work is done to a good standard. The problem is they don’t do that at all, they just ensure the paperwork exists.

Agreed but how does an industry funded body do that?

MCS need to focus on what their web site says it does, namely ensuring customers are protected and  work is done to a good standard. The problem is they don’t do that at all, they just ensure the paperwork exists.

I so recognise that.  My first employer, which I worked for for nearly 30 years, had an endless stream of quality initiatives culminating in 'six sigma', shortly after which it went bust. None of them made a scrap of difference, so far as I could tell (but they took up lots of time which otherwise could have been directed towards improving quality), and your observation fits perfectly.

Real quality IMHO arises from a mindset/culture combined with a high level of competence.  Individuals need to be determined to do the right thing, not the expedient thing, and be given the freedom and support to do so.  No amount of paperwork will ever instill that. 

Perhaps that's a fatal and inevitable (?) flaw with organisations like MCS, which purport to instill quality into a disparate, independent, workforce over which they have no control. 

MCS have never gone beyond the paperwork to the quality of the job.

• the human condition in general (if there is a chance to exploit someone, particularly someone vulnerable, some people will exploit it)

• lack of/deliberately ineffective regulation. 

The former is what it is, always has been, and always will be. 

The latter could change over a period of perhaps 10-15 years.  This is because its a long job to get right without cramping innovation, may require several iterations, people have got used to circumventing such regulation as there is, we have deskilled our civil service so they are reliant on advice from industry (IMHO far too reliant) and quite possibly have become used to being instructed to minimize regulation or the effectiveness of regulation, and there are lots of areas to cover not just this one.

However such change can only happen if we chose consistently vote for it, which we don't, in fact we vote largely against it (for better or worse) and thus it almost certainly wont happen.  Caveat Emptor! 

This being the case and just like almost everything else, there is only one solution, namely to educate the customer.   RHH is doing that but needs to become a compulsory read!

MCS have announced they intend to vet 5,000 heat pump installers by March 2027. That's roughly 18 months from now.

If it is March 2027, unless I've gone bonkers, that is only 9 months away or maybe 10 months to the end of March 2027, say 300 days (and counting). 5000 / 300 = 17 per day. Same daily rate as yours, but arrived at differently!

I totally agree it is another re-arranging the deck chairs while the Titanic sinks exercise. 

This is what mostly comes to mind: Quis nos ab his custodibus servabit?