MCS Not Ready for Monopoly
MCS have been widely reported to have failed in care and compliance. Are they ready to become the UK’s sole appointed body for renewables oversight? According to a government consultation, 70% say ‘no’.
| Duncan Hayes <duncan.hayes@> |  Sat 17 Jan, 12:01 (3 days ago) | ||
| to MCS, DESNZ | |||
Dear Ian,
Congratulations on MCS’ appointment as the sole arbiter of government clean energy schemes. I’m sure this has taken considerable effort. A single scheme has the potential to bring real consumer benefits – provided protections are not weighted in favour of MCS’ commercial needs and aspirations, values are truly aligned to scheme goals, and innovation is able to flourish.
However, I fear MCS is not ready for this significant step.
At the end of this email is an article that I implore you to read with the utmost seriousness. MCS’ credentials as a competent body in delivery of the above, will be judged upon your response.
As founder and advocate at www.nature-society.org, and with an MSc focus in Sustainability and Behaviour Change, I am fully aligned to the decarbonisation and electrification of Britain.
However, this must be a just transition – through the lens of real lives and real homes.
In contrast, ECO4 has prioritised incomes over outcomes, governed by an absence of accountability, to the detriment of many.
I note that 70% of respondents of a recent government consultation did not agree with MCS’ sole appointment, and that there have been widely published failures of compliance, under MCS stewardship to date.
That said, I respect MIS as a strong and well-written set of standards. Despite this, many are dismayed by how weakly those standards appear to be upheld by the organisation that publishes them.
No doubt, renewables are on a journey and we cannot expect perfection overnight. However, we can expect the values that underpin success: humility, curiosity, protection of the most vulnerable, and a clear prioritisation of people as a precursor to income.
Good leadership does not conceal failure; it confronts it, learns from it, and improves because of it.
If you accept this as fact, then things are likely on the right track.
Equipped with this ethos, a true leader would review the article and comments below and act not to conceal, but to engage and improve.
The question remains: what kind of leader are you, truly.
I ask genuinely, as I am unsure as to the answer, yet great responsibility rests on your shoulders.
All judgement is reserved whilst my home remains in ruins, without heat for three consecutive winters, despite clear and flagrant breaches of MIS standards, by a company now widely referred to as a ‘rogue installer’, whose misrepresentation MCS accepted blindly, at face-value, and without any engagement with myself, nor technical review.
You can lean on supposition. But supposition does not stand in law. Should this enter a court, MCS stands to be very embarrassed indeed. I enclose the detailed evidence of independent expert witnesses. A great deal more is to hand, along with the testimonies of many others.
The cleanest route forward is in taking genuine steps to protect consumers, rather than a continued denial of accountability, in absence of safeguarding. Please trust me when I say, we are well-versed with the full extent of the situation and will not accept any politicisation by way of reply. Indeed, denials and cover-ups will result in a re-doubling of our efforts to highlight these concerns. Instead, we seek engagement, acceptance, collaboration, and alignment.
I note that, in situations such as my own – where homeowners have been left with no reasonable path of resolution and without heat as a consequence of the low-carbon transition – MCS has refused to provide any meaningful means of escalation or oversight as to its own competence, including technical review of these matters, or a review as to its conduct. That signals a systemic lack of care, when surely the end goal is the improvement, rather than the detriment of lives.
I would welcome a direct response on the following:
- What escalation route exists within MCS for severe, high-harm cases where an installer cannot or will not remediate, and the consumer is left without heat, or significantly higher bills?
- What independent technical review does MCS provide (or commission) when alleged MIS non-compliance is substantive and ongoing?
- How will it act in light of the clear breaches documented?
- What specific changes will MCS make to ensure consumers receive timely and effective support – not merely a closed complaints process?
I note your preference of ignoring my emails. This will simply result in emails being published and the persistence of these valid concerns.
I attach/offer a short evidence pack and offer resolution via discussion, whether with yourself, or the relevant senior technical lead. A competent route to resolution over the inevitability of legal proceedings is and has alway been preferred. No recipient of government-funded works should need to resort to the further injustice of the courts, especially in lieu of the simplest of courtesies.
The article mentioned:
https://renewableheatinghub.co.uk/uk-heat-pump-problems-a-complaint-process-thats-irreparably-broken/. Also posted here: https://nature-society.org/mcs-a-failure-of-oversight/
As underpinned
And here: https://jacothenorth.net/blog/grab-the-money-and-run/
And here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3zlp9gyqdo
Ahd here: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/
And here: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ATMEWUQbo/
And here: https://www.itv.com/news/2025-12-04/insulating-your-home-how-to-beat-the-scammers
And here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHIeZ83RBVY
And here: https://newyddion-s4c-cymru
And a dedicated ITV Wales programme on CES, here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0hf56lk also mentioned here – https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nest-jenkins-5431351a8_swansea-energy-company-wrecking-homes-with-activity
As warned to DESNZ in July 2025, here – https://nature-society.org/a-very-personal-story/
This is by no means a comprehensive account of the media.
More will follow until meaningful action is secured and standards are upheld.
My clear preference has always been open engagement and practical resolution for the many homeowners reporting increased energy bills following works delivered under a scheme explicitly intended to reduce fuel poverty.
Yours sincerely,
Duncan Hayes
Founder, Advocate, and ECO4 Victim