I think this is a really good idea. We’re seeing more and more ECO4 horror stories and every time someone posts their experience it becomes painfully obvious that people don’t know where to turn or what protections they don’t actually have. Having a dedicated thread makes perfect sense… it gives other homeowners a single, easy-to-find place to read, share and compare what’s happening under this scheme.

For anyone who hasn’t seen it, this is the other ECO4 thread worth keeping an eye on:

https://renewableheatinghub.co.uk/forums/renewable-heating-air-source-heap-pumps-ashps/my-misgivings-about-installing-ashp-and-solar-panels-via-the-eco4-scheme

My own view (and I’ve been consistent about this) is that ECO4 has become an unbelievably unethical minefield. The design of the scheme is structurally flawed, the delivery mechanism is broken and the quality issues we’re now seeing were inevitable. But what makes ECO4 especially troubling is that the avenues for redress are even more limited than the already threadbare “able-to-pay” protections under MCS.

At least with a standard MCS installation you have a recognisable installer, a certification body, a consumer code and (in theory) a line of accountability. Under ECO4, you often don’t even know who your installer actually is, let alone how to make a coherent complaint. Work is subcontracted, rebadged, parcelled out to third parties and delivered at a volume-first, quality-last pace that would never pass scrutiny in any other part of this industry.

Add to that the near-total absence of meaningful oversight (whether technical, contractual or regulatory) and you end up with a scheme where vulnerable households are being fitted with systems that are unfit for purpose, oversized, undersized, poorly designed or simply thrown in because “the grant covers it”.

And then, once something goes wrong?

Trying to get anyone to take responsibility is like falling into a bureaucratic black hole. You’re bounced between managing agents, installers, contractors, assessors and ECO administrators, all of whom deny responsibility while pointing at someone else.

ECO4 is not just flawed; it’s dangerous. And the lack of recourse is worse than anything we’re seeing under mainstream MCS installations, and that’s really saying something.

A dedicated thread will help people see patterns, share experiences and hopefully avoid some of the traps others have fallen into. 

I’ll add to the forums with anonymised emails and DMs I’ve received.

@editor have to say I'm disappointed my signposting was edited mars.

You would benefit from the additional traffic and from my experience rhh does not offer the same support re eco4 specific advice regarding regulatory issues.

Ie: trustmark, scheme providers, certification bodies, ukas, retro fit co ordinator, mcs, dro, discussions with mp's, ofgem, desnz & pac. 

I get it you're running a business but this isn't your competition,  this wouldn't cost you and you would have benefitted.

@bart, I don’t promote Facebook groups for many reasons, and the same caution applies to any third-party organisations. We get approached constantly by companies, charities, “support groups” and various entities wanting to piggyback off our community. Once you start allowing external signposting without scrutiny, it opens the door to organisations whose intentions aren’t always as altruistic as they appear.

It’s not about competition... it’s about safeguarding the forums, maintaining trust and ensuring members aren’t quietly funnelled elsewhere into environments we can’t moderate or vouch for. If we’re going to direct homeowners to another platform, it has to be something we’ve looked into properly and are confident won’t expose them to misinformation, commercial agendas or poor advice.

I absolutely respect the work being done by others, but my responsibility here is to protect this community first and foremost. 

Perhaps point the ECO4 etc. sufferers towards RHH instead? Toodles.

@editor understood and appreciated. If you could look into it I think it would be beneficial for you RHH community and in reducing suffering. The biggest issue, as I understand it, is a lack of collective organised action. Conversely the regulators and energy suppliers are very well organised.

@toodles very happy too (I have no vested interest other than to reduce suffering. As already stated I couldn't access the same knowledge base as I've found via the links shared. Eg was news of the recent PAC review shared here?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VqBbESzzGW8