@jamespa It is very emotional week for many of us, I personally have invested maybe 2 years worth of money and assets to raise our game throughout 2024 and 2025, the payback started late this year but hey thats investment for you. This was after being especially cross in March 2021 with the cancellation of the GHG after spending 2019 - 2020 getting re-qualified to do the grants for then the Government to cancel them and then re-open in May 2022 as the BUS scheme. I admit I sulked as I had lost around £60,000 due to the grant ending in 2021 but after my sulking in for a couple of years in 2023 I decided to get back in the game as we were getting so many calls to attend bad installations, so once again we thought we could do better and here we are again. I think it is a good idea that the grants end between 2028 and 2030 but in 2 stages 2028-2029 they reduce to £5000 and then in 2029-2030 they reduce to £3000 and then from 2030 industry can find the difference with more cost effective solutions installing with no grants or a smaller £3000 or something like that subject to government decision, but if its ended like before then its time to pack up for sure.

I am just pleased ASHP is only 20% of our business and we do it like a specialist rather than for volume. For us it's 2 redundancies and about £400,000 up-chain losses to merchants, sub-contractors and suppliers. All of my skilled staff are multi trained anyways so the engineers will stay with our commercial stuff and to on A-W ASHP just do servicing, repairs and the odd installation for people that can afford the full cost.

I do not always say a lot on the forum and I can't count how many times I have written 800 word responses only to delete them and not post as I realise at the end I wrote emotionally rather than practically. I joined to help, I joined to learn and I like these elements but sometimes inside we are sad and hopeful that one day something will give, someone will help and get our industry in an orderly and professional manner we can all be proud of.

@jamespa I've recently completed our MCS survey.  The heat pump was commissioned on 25th June this year, and the first request from MCS to complete the survey was received on 15th October, so approximately 3.5 months after install.  I suspect it's a 3 month contact date, but with dates based upon the payment of the BUS to the installer post-completion, which presumably takes a couple of weeks to filter through.

We'd had a small amount of heating activity prior to the survey being received, but an installation done in mid-April using these timescales would be asked to feed back opinion without potentially experiencing heating activity from their installations (or at least anything noticeable) and certainly without having gone through a heating season and determined the costs/savings of such.

On the wider debate, for what it's worth, we'd fall within the 'middle class' definition of customers as referenced earlier in the thread.  With the BUS grant and the £2k grant from our bank, the net cost of our installation was £2,850, which made it comparable with the equivalent cost of replacing a gas boiler.  The bank grant was a post-installation process, so we had no guarantee that we would have been eligible for it (although on the face of it we could see that we were likely to fulfil all the requirements) but we had essentially committed to a cost to change of £4,850 at the time we committed ourselves, which was still close enough to the cost of a replacement gas boiler.

That, to me, is the essential point on which many people will choose a heat pump over a gas boiler.  If the cost is 'close enough' and there is a good prospect of savings from the new system, then people will take the plunge.  Given the true cost of installations (and having experienced one I can now see why this would be around the £10k mark for a typical job with new pump, cylinder and replacement radiators, plus the cost of labour over several days) the existing BUS grant is just about sufficient to hit that sweet spot for most typical customers.  I'd expected that it might be cut back again to the £5k level in the near future, but the proposed change to low income households, if it comes to fruition, would have been a deal-killer for our household.  Without a meaningful BUS we would undoubtedly be living with a new gas boiler right now.

@transparent As Far as I am aware all of our customers recently have been having inspections or calls, I am sure most of this year as many of them tell me it happened. 

I never thought to ask what was asked, I just always said, "all ok?" and the reply was always "yer I think so?' so we just left it like that. I would alsways end the call with, "if you need us just call and our team will help you, see you in a year for the service or for the 2nd commission which ever was 1st"

@sheriff-fatman to expand on the wider point here, the way I see it is the BUS is an agreement between the home occupier owner and the Government to encourage more of us to transition sooner rather than just stick that boiler in again.

I don't quite see why we think this is giving money to any middle class people? we are just giving to to people, no one is excluded? regardless of who uses it the Government grant surly wants to treat everyone the same and say if you were changing or thinking of changing your boiler anyway, take this sum of money, add it to the £3,000 you were going to spend on the boiler and take the leap, help us reach Net Zero because your small part helps and all chip in together. If someone on low income is changing their boiler they are still spending £3,000 the same as someone who has as spare £3,000.

Now I would think it fair if the Government wanted to come up with a scheme where a low home income got more, like a bigger grant for say, insulation, solar and ASHP all rolled in to 1, I mean that would then help someone in fuel poverty. If they did this and the BUS we would get to Net Zero a bit quicker maybe? 

The BUS is for the initial retro part or cost of making a self build heating circuits ASHP ready only and nothing to really do with the ASHP itself, the ASHP is the boiler and you are paying for this part like you would the boiler (I know they are a bit more expensive but you see my point) Take the BUS away, don't bother upgrading, shove a boiler in as your circuits are boiler compatible, thats the deal, grant = new circuit, no grant = no new circuit. Simple's

Oh I am on a roll....

Forgive me if I don't write or respond to any further posts as I am just about to fly out on holiday and I am having a week off, I will return on the day the budget announces and we will see if we are done for or we are not and we can all go from there.

Best of luck to all my ASHP associates, customers and all.

@ashp-bobba Our ASHP installation was completed and commissioned in mid- February, 2023; we had an MCS follow up ‘phone call a few weeks later. If an installation is made in mid-summer, I wonder if the follow-up to check on the heating should be within weeks - or left until the following winter? Regards, Toodles.

@toodles I would say winter would be a better result but sooner if you had issues or had complained, it would not take much for them to structure it this way I am sure, I suppose they are ticking boxes and doing what they are expected to, hello, you happy, great thanks.

@ashp-bobba, it must be devastating when you've invested a lot of time, effort and money for a potential announcement like this to derail things. Having said that, this is still all very speculative, and the money saved from BUS is pittance when compared to other frivolous expenditures. We need quality installers like you to stay motivated and engaged!

Posted by: @ashp-bobba

↑

@toodles I would say winter would be a better result but sooner if you had issues or had complained, it would not take much for them to structure it this way I am sure, I suppose they are ticking boxes and doing what they are expected to, hello, you happy, great thanks.

That's exactly what they want to do... get high numbers and say we've amazing to cover the enormous incompetence.  

Keeping the MCS thread going, I've pieced together this article on my interactions with MCS this past week, coupled with @mairia's comms on her case, finished with a soupçon of Ian Rippin's hypocrisy that I was kindly alerted to by @transparent.

https://renewableheatinghub.co.uk/mcs-certification-exposed-lack-of-verification-raises-questions/

Its a very well written article @mars, well done.  Can you somehow get it to some people with influence?

Im not convinced that the regime you describe is practical or affordable, and even less hopeful that its likely to be delivered.  I had until recently placed some hope in flexi-orb, but their recent responses on this forum has damaged that.

Quite honestly my personal opinion is, and has been for some time, that consumers would be better off without MCS or indeed any replacement (we already the various bodies like  NICEIC, Hetas etc, why do we need another?).  Without MCS installers would have to compete on reputation, just like almost any other service, and perhaps most importantly would have no 'get out clause' to lean on when the customer is not satisfied.  The better ones would rise to the top, the poorer ones would gradually fall away.  Nobody would have to pay the massive overhead to which we are all condemned. 

Of course there will still be failures, but at least the failures wouldn't have an organisation behind them which they could rely on to get them out of jail.

@jamespa our install was mid September 2025, we had the MCS questionnaire a few weeks later.

@JamesPa
the section of the media that supports the green agenda will bear as much responsibility, should the green agenda be watered down over the next months and particularly at the next election, as the section of the media that is opposed to the green agenda.

Why? Because, just like its opponents, it presents one dimensional arguments to the public representing almost everything that is happening as bad (or, in your words, stupid), whilst failing to acknowledge either the difficulty of government or the conflicting decisions that government has to face. Thus it seeds discontent with government which plays directly into the hands of those who would describe the green agenda as 'stupid net zero'.

First....
Who is this 'Green Supporting Media'? I think you need to give me examples otherwise it's just something plucked out of the air. I find it quite baffling.

It bears no relation to what I've read. The article about BUS was in the Guardian - did you read it? Because it isn't "one dimensional". Have you read their coverage on the economy? Or the forthcoming budget? Or anything else? I'm often quite critical of the Guardian - it's mostly (but not entirely) a classic liberal outlet and I'm not a fan but no one can accuse them of 'one dimensional arguments'.

So I'm kind of baffled who this 'green supporting media' is and what is a 'green agenda' ? Sorry but this just sounds like a bunch of stereotypes that are not actually grounded in anything concrete.

Second...
You are conflating my personal opinion in a forum post with 'the green agenda/green supporting media' - in terms that say 'everything is bad' whilst 'failing to acknowledge the difficulty of government or conflicting decisions the government faces'. Where's this green supporting media saying this?

From my perspective that's just not true. Sorry.
In that post was clear examples of coherent policy from other countries. That's not 'one dimensional' arguments that "represents everything as bad".

I don't do 'green supporting' anything - I'm old school I like evidence, data, facts - I'm not a lobbyist. I accept the science of global warming - but how we deal with that I've got no fixed view beyond we need to find routes to decarbonisation and it needs to be inclusive.

I don't use words like 'energy transition' because its false, it has never happened, ever, in the history of energy. Likewise I have no use for 'Net Zero' which is equally problematic.

So to suggest that's one-dimensional is kind of funny. Particularly as throughout my posts here I've argued for inclusive policy-making - particularly for low income people, renters and so on. That's not one-dimensional. Lol... It's precisely HOW we bring in those who may otherwise be left out & be fodder for the anti-decarbonisation agenda of the bogeymen.

In my post above, I gave you concrete examples of constructive policy from other countries. But if these things aren't happening in the UK it isn't because of 'the difficulty of government' or 'conflicting decisions' a government faces or even economic reasons.

They are policy choices. Policy choices that should come from clear well-thought out agendas. Which no government in this country has offered for a long time. We have fits of good policy - the nationalisation of a chunk of the grid by the previous incumbents, for example (and making Fintan Slye the CEO*) - but there's nothing joined up. Or if there is it doesn't stay that way.

If we aren't doing that it's because of the choices of our politicians - not the 'difficulties of government'. (Which I probably know more about than most, thanks to my job).

For example, not having clear product labelling for energy consumption or no serious benchmarks for quality are not due to 'difficulties of government'. Not passing laws to mandate heat pumps and solar in new builds is not due to 'conflicting decisions' - it's due to lobbying by major building companies who also fund our politicians. That's the reality.

'Net Zero' is a made up label that can be, and has been, taken apart by academics but it's a convenient short hand that's useful for public consumption. We need to be offering major public information and education on this - we aren't - that's not because of the 'difficulties of government'. It's because we don't do much 'public information' anymore. Let alone have a coherent policy direction that can be 'sold' to the public. It's because our governments are too often dominated by lobbies and revolving doors. Go and read the member's register of funding if you want examples.

What the public notices isn't what's written in the Guardian it is their weekly expenditure. When endless additions are stapled onto electricity bills in the name of 'green energy', that's a policy choice - that isn't inevitable. I think because I've actually lived elsewhere in Europe I know first hand there's other ways of doing things.

We put heat pumps on the agenda but didn't accommodate training for sufficient numbers. City & Guilds only got a heat pump training mandate last year... this should've happened years ago. (Don't get me started on the decimation of FE in the '90s which has had a massive impact on our national skills base). Now by 'suggesting' (I'd say trialling the idea for reactions) that BUS will get axed except via ECO just as a bunch of youngsters have started training and apprenticeships is not very coherent. I also feel really sorry for the smaller fitters. They'll get hammered. This matters. They vote too.

Back to this:

@jamespa

the section of the media that supports the green agenda will bear as much responsibility, should the green agenda be watered down over the next months and particularly at the next election, as the section of the media that is opposed to the green agenda".

The green-supporting media is IMHO failing, by joining the chorus of unrestrained and un-contexed criticism, and in its failure is defeating its own objectives

Are you saying be nice to the government or the bogeyman will get you? 😁

I'm not sure whether to laugh or just try and rescue my raised eyebrows off the ceiling at that phenomenal statement.

Come on James - wherever this "Green Supporting Media" is and whatever this mystery 'green agenda' is - I love the way you displace responsibility from the politicians doing the 'watering down' to the only outlet - the Guardian (?) reporting it reasonably well. Sod political agency, politicians are mere puppets 'cos: "It Woz The Sun Wot Done It". 🤦🏻‍♀️😂

Where is this "unrestrained and un-contexted criticism" ? I'm missing out, obviously. 

If the Bogeymen get elected it won't be because of reporting (although to be clear I'm not including the rise of GB News & other TV/YouTube outlets in this) , it will be because huge swathes of this country have been politically disenfranchised and any hope they had at the last election has been swiftly hammered out of them . Should that not be reported? Should we not mention the rising child poverty or the collapsing NHS?  The major election problem in this country isn't 'who' people vote for, it's that many don't vote at all - they see no point. That's a tragedy in my opinion.

@transparent

I echo these comments from @jamespa

The media seems to report on what is currently happening, particularly when something hasn't worked out as hoped for.

But the route to Net Zero necessarily has forward vision, which sets the path

Er what's 'currently happening' is called news. That thing that journalists do... 😉

But the route to 'Net Zero' does not have a forward vision in this country. That's the problem - all my posting these last few days has been about.

Please don't conflate NESO's planning for the grid with an overall decarbonisation policy 'vision'.  There isn't much of one. What there is are lots of competing lobbies and interests vying to get their 'thing' adopted and lots of debates in the rarefied air of academia. There's also been some quite dodgy research because there was a bunch of funding lobbed about.  

Meanwhile, we need to be promoting renewable heating because heating is a major source of carbon emissions. By undermining BUS and chipping away at decarbonisation policies it sends a very clumsy message that devalues 'green energy' policy. I bought a heat pump because my gas boiler died, without BUS it would've been impossible. Some only managed it because their mortgage company offered green funding too. Today there's hundreds of new heat pump owners on social media saying exactly the same thing.

Don't blame the Guardian (I can't believe I'm defending them 😂) for writing a fairly balanced article about the BUS grant possibly getting cut.  Blame the Spads (Special Advisors on the government payroll) and politicians doing the leaking and the cutting.

I think I need to run media training for y'all. 🫢😁😂 

Now to post a really interesting heat pump link (next post)