Nin compliant Install by another installer and fraid by customer.

[Worcester]

So bitch moment or malpractice?

We visited a potential client at the end of November and they were desperate to get a Biomass system installed before the end of December (10% reduction on 1st January 2015), as it was a listed building we pointed out the need for listed building consent that the other installer quoting didn't.

We advised thay we couldn't issue an MCS Certificate until the permission was granted.

So keeping in touch they have submitted a Listed Building application which has not yet been approved, however the boiler has been installed, certificate issued and Domestic RHI applied for before the 31st December by the other Installer

Customer even lied to me this morning saying that they had already got the consent.

Smacks of fraud by two parties.

Just let it go or raise the mal-practice with MCS/ Gemserve and Ofgem?

Status:

Pending Consideration

---

Received Date:	03/12/14	Statutory Start Date:	09/12/14
		Statutory Expiry Date:	03/02/15
Consultation Period From:	11/12/14	Consultation Period End Date:	09/01/15

 

[TedM]

Seems to cover an area I have not noticed. Which part of the MCS Standards is this contravening?

 

[Worcester]

Biomass:

MIS 3004 Issue 4.0 Biomass Clause: 4.3 Page 11
"Where required, planning permission shall be obtained before work is commenced."

and on the MCS Biomass Compliance Certificate - v1.0 Question 3.1 asks:
"Have all regulations been met and approvals obtained (including planning approval as required)?"

You can pass that responsibility to the owner to obtain, you still need it though, and when you complete the MCS Certificate, it also asks:

Renewable Heat Incentive:
"How have planning regulations been complied with?:
Permitted Development Rights (PDR)
Planning permission granted: Application Reference: "

You have to answer positively to one or the other of those two options.

So clearly they have KNOWINGLY made blatant incorrect (fraudulent) submission to MCS

 

[Worcester]

mmm... Asked a general question about planning permission to Ofgem and got this back:

[FONT=&quot]"Not having full planning permission is not a remit of the Domestic RHI. You must supply us with the certificates required to become accredited and this is not one of them.[/FONT]"

So I guess its down to the Installer, and we know what MCS would do to them: won't even get a ruler across the knuckles ...

 

[TedM]

Planning permission and listed building consent are two separate matters.

Whether listed building consent comes under the catch-all "planning regulations" is a matter of interpretation and could possibly be argued either way by a suitably expensive lawyer.

Planning permission for biomass is usually about the installation of a new chimney. Is that the case here?

 

[Worcester]

Planning permission for biomass is usually about the installation of a new chimney. Is that the case here?

Yes, as it's listed, the permitted development rights are removed.

 

[Gavin A]

it's not just issuing the cert, it's actually installing the system before listed building consent was granted. Doubt the listed building officer will be best pleased with that happening - IIRC that's properly illegal.

 

[Worcester]

Officer doesn't know (yet ...)

 

[TedM]

And what happens if the consent is not granted?

 

[Worcester]

Then I guess he has to rip it out ...

In practice, goes to appeal, cites PPS22 (if I remember correctly) that the council has to look favourable upon renewables, and as it is actually done ok, it will be a slap on the wrist to the homeowner, and then approved. (It actually looks OK, that's not the point though..)

and the MCS installer continues his bad practice....

 

[BruceB]

Yes, as it's listed, the permitted development rights are removed.

Oddly, the permitted developement rights are not removed for a listed building looking at SI2056/2011 Part 40 Class E. It may well fall foul of other more general listed building law if it affects the character of the listed building, but the PD rights were not specifically removed for biomass flues whereas they were for pv. So I detect a different intent.

 

[BruceB]

PPSs are dead - long live the NPPF and PPG

 

[TedM]

Whacking a SS flue up the outside of a listed building without express consent is likely to be frowned on by any conservation officer.

It is odd that listed buildings are not expressly mentioned in the PD legislation on flues (it is also missing from the first two heat pump clauses but included in the air source one) and the only reason I can guess is that the drafter missed its significance.

But I wouldn't advise anyone to rely on the fact - always get the consent first. There are other circumstances when PD rights can be removed.

 

[BruceB]

I had not thought about the biomass reasoning before but had on the gshp. My thinking was that as the only external work was underground loops, they took the view that was unlikely to affect the character of a listed building. So for gshp/wshp I thought it was deliberate.

That is not completely consistent though, because for other work here I have had, on the insistance of the conservation officer, to pay archaeologists to sit and watch ground being dug away and record anything we found (which was nothing significant!)

 

[TedM]

IIRC the addition of ASHP and wind turbines to permitted development was slightly controversial due to the noise element and they went through a few extra loops during the consultation and debating process, so these clauses were quite possibly drafted at a different time to the others.

But that still doesn't explain the difference for biomass flues unless that was also added at a different time. Don't expect joined-up thinking from legislators.

And, as you know, even internal work that may never be visible, needs consent on a listed building. I recall one of those 'restoration' style TV programmes where the officer was arguing that the original floor joists needed to be retained.