Skip to main content

Which assets carry MEES risk? Reading minimum energy standards across a portfolio

NZC Portal Ltd cover image with the headline "Which assets carry MEES risk?" on a light background with a green accent and the NZC Portal logo.

Separate what applies today from what’s proposed, and keep the evidence that decides both.

Ask three people in a property business what the commercial MEES position is, and you may get three different answers. Some will quote the current rule, some a proposal they read about, and some a figure from an old board pack. For a fund or asset manager, the useful question isn’t “what’s the headline?” It’s “which of our assets carry MEES risk, and can we prove our position on each one?”

That’s a portfolio-management question, and most of the answer sits in data you already hold.

Two lists, not one

A common board-pack mistake is a single “MEES risk” number that mixes today’s legal exposure with a possible future requirement. It overstates the immediate problem, understates the value of evidence, and puts capex in the wrong order.

List 1, exposure today. The lets that don’t meet the minimum standard in force now, plus every asset relying on a registered exemption and the date that exemption ends.

List 2, planning risk. The assets that could be caught if the government’s proposals become law. Treat this list as risk management. Keep it out of covenant language and lender commitments until the legislation exists.

Keeping the lists apart lets you answer two different board questions honestly: “are we compliant now?” and “where should we plan capex?”

What the asset register should hold

Most of the work is making sure each asset record is complete and current:

The evidence column matters more than it looks. The exemptions register is self-certified, so the quality of your cost and savings evidence decides how well a position stands up when a buyer, lender or regulator asks.

Acquisitions, disposals and lapsing exemptions

Exemptions don’t always travel with an asset. A building bought with a seller’s exemption can become an exposed asset on completion. Exemptions also expire, and an expiry that nobody has diarised turns a compliant asset into a problem.

So the MEES position belongs in acquisition due diligence, disposal packs and the quarterly portfolio review, not just in an annual compliance exercise.

What to take out of the board pack

Five questions for your next portfolio review

  1. Which of our lets carry MEES risk under today’s rules, and which rely on an exemption?
  2. Which exemptions end in the coming year, and what’s the plan for each?
  3. Which assets would be caught if current proposals became law?
  4. For those, do we hold cost and payback evidence we’d be happy to defend?
  5. Who owns our response when the government publishes its full position?

Where NZC Portal Ltd fits

None of this needs a new framework. It needs EPCs, floor areas, exemptions and evidence in one governed record, so “what’s our MEES position?” can be answered from one record, not rebuilt as a project. That’s what the EPC & MEES module from NZC Portal Ltd is for: EPC tracking and MEES risk. Because the data is captured accurately at building level, it holds up at site, portfolio and fund level.

Software doesn’t make a building compliant. Assessors lodge EPCs, owners decide on capex, and advisers sign where sign-off is needed. What changes is that the evidence stops getting lost between them.

See how NZC Portal Ltd keeps portfolio EPC and MEES evidence in one place: nzcportal.co.uk/demo

General guidance only. Check the current GOV.UK guidance for the rules that apply to each asset. This isn’t legal advice.

Sources: DESNZ non-domestic MEES landlord guidance · MEES non-domestic PRS consultation page