The Future of MCS...

[Worcester]

- the IET will be responsible for producing all 'MCS' technical specs
Gemserv's 3 year contract with DECC to operate MCS runs out this October.

Thanks TedM

The first part - as per my post crossed in the ether, it's more that just PV, so I guess others will also be involved.

The second, that's going to cause a nice mess, unless they issue a 6 month extension to get us to end of March 2016

 

[The Solar King]

For most contributors to this site MCS may not be relevant because they work to required standards, understand the need for training and constantly strive to improve their operations. Sadly this is not true for many others in the industry. Correctly operated the Scheme should provide the necessary safeguards for consumers.

As far as standards are concerned, there is a great deal of interchangability on authorship of PV including new IET guide. Main mover behind both has been Martin Cotterall. Griff Thomas has also been involved in both. This is true of other standards. MCs has been the only route to providing comprehensive coverage of all aspects of installation. For this reason there will be a new non electrical PV guide.

Biggest problem with MCS in the past has not been the installation standards or product standards, but the silly paperwork systems surrounding the programme. The other issue has been the accreditation bodies implementing the scheme. They are the ones for whom this has been a dripping roast and in many ways have done much to discredit the programme through their actions. Perpetuating stuff that gives them the excuse to make money from checking non essential clerical procedures is nonsense.

Historically complaints about the scheme on this site have been about poor implementation and businesses not following basic standards in installation, then nothing being done about it.

Hopefully addressing these issues within a new structure will make the scheme relevant. It may seem ironic that other markets that don't have the equivalent of MCS see it as a major benefit.

As the saying goes you never miss your mother til she's dead and buried in the grave.

 

[Gavin A]

it'd be fine if MCS were some sort of gold standard, but it isn't.

At best it attempts to enforce mediocrity at least in the PV world.

Bad design, underperforming systems... no worries, we've got a get out clause to cover all those eventualities, as long as you've done an MCS shading assessment from the window below the roof, and most importantly you've got loads of stickers all over the place then everyone's happy. Except the customer.

 

[jason121]

Spent the other day with one of our Heat Pump suppliers, their technical guy sits on the MCS steering group for Heatpumps.

The following points came out:

1) MCS is distancing from Decc and becoming a charitable organisation.

2) MCS is pushing that only MCS certified organisations will be allowed to install renewable energy solutions to be building regs compliant under a CPS.

Not sure whether this is a good or a bad thing....

With the potential demise of the RHI and FiT not to far away, there would be no reason for the existence of MCS..

Why couldn't or shouldn't the existing competent person scheme providers be able to certify organisations / people to be able to install the relevant technologies directly without all the bureaucratic input of MCS & RECC

The next Solar PV standard is being developed by outside of MCS, and there are other guides e.g the safety first one, the Heat Pump associations could take on the HP standards and BPEC / HETAS the biomass elements...

So does the continued existence of MCS beyond FiT and RHI have value?
What are your thoughts?
Jobs for the boys or an important standards body that adds value and improved security / quality / comfort (it'll work...) for the consumer?

Looks like its started As previously announced the Microgeneration CertificationScheme (MCS) is in the process of establishing the MicrogenerationCertification Scheme Charitable Foundation (MCS CF). We are delighted toannounce that we have now appointed six Trustees to serve on the inauguralboard of the Charity.

 

[jason121]

And Gemserv turned over 15 million pounds last year

 

[whinmoor]

Nice to see people with plenty of hands-on experience running the show....not...

http://www.microgenerationcertification.org/images/MCS_CF_Trustees_Biographies.pdf

 

[solarsavings]

Not the sort to make large expense claims either by the look of their history.

 

[Worcester]

So definitely about managing the money and processes so they can be 'seen' to operate as a charity, and not about the technology or market sector (industry).. Also though not stated, you can guarantee a certain level of personal contact/influence with politicians.

Does not bode well for the development of the industry. More regulation and rules to come.

This should be simplified not complicated, don;t see that happening tho with this move

HOWEVER, if they do achieve the 'regulatory' status as per gassafe for renewables, it MIGHT close out some of the cowboys..

 

[Gavin A]

wow, not a single actual representative from the renewables industry, who actually fund the entire thing.

 

[TedM]

It looks like the charity will simply have an over-sight task with MCS operation left in the hands of the MCS Service Company with the latter being further extracted from under Gemserv.

Trustee job spec: The Microgeneration Certification Scheme Charitable Foundation (MCS CF): Trustees - NEDworks

Last October's Tripartite agreement (DECC, Gemserv, MCSSCo): http://www.microgenerationcertification.org/images/MCS_Agreement_-_Signed_2010.10.01.PDF

 

[Gavin A]

can't help thinking that this should have been set up as more of a union / members organisation where we actually get to vote for our representatives.

but now, it's just another quango.

 

[Worcester]

can't help thinking that this should have been set up as more of a union / members organisation where we actually get to vote for our representatives.

but now, it's just another quango.

There is still that opportunity as the Legislation doesn't give MCS exclusivity - YET ... there can be another body set up

Perhaps the 3,556 MCS certified companies should each donate £100 to set it up

How many do you think would go along with it ...

They make shed loads more money out of the certificate registration fees than they do the membership..

 

[The Solar King]

There was nothing to stop anyone applying to be a trustee. Thought about it myself but decide I couldn't commit the time. If you didn't apply quit moaning about who was appointed. There are certain qualities, attributes and experience that are required for the role of trustee. What makes you think those appointed will be unable to successfully fulfil the required role?

 

[The Solar King]

Equally, there was adequate opportunity to become involved in discussion about the future framework of MCS. All you had to do was become involved. Please do not complain about those who bothered and committed their time if you didn't. You can't have it both ways. What evidence is there that a different structure would be more successful in delivering he required outcomes?

 

[Worcester]

Equally, there was adequate opportunity to become involved in discussion about the future framework of MCS. All you had to do was become involved. Please do not complain about those who bothered and committed their time if you didn't. You can't have it both ways. What evidence is there that a different structure would be more successful in delivering he required outcomes?

Depends upon how you define the outcomes, the gov'ts requirements are simple, however atm with three bodies involved - the CPS / Certification Bodies, MCS and RECC, yet NONE of them actually champion the consumer when it goes wrong... and name any publicity about anyone being struck off, or the phoenix companies, fold one, start another...

We are still seeing a debacle of over selling, I have one quote on my desk from a company showing me £70,000 in fuel savings over the next 20 years if I swap from Oil to a pellet boiler - My current oil bill is less than £1500 per year... and yet some people will be suckered in... I don't see that these changes will address the fundamental failings of the MCS scheme.

Strip it down, simplify it, use pre-published standards by other technical authorities, charge an appropriate fee for a certificate - it costs less than £3 to send in my building regs notices, and for other work, that includes insurance on my warranty..