BTR:

 

Your replies seem a bit aggressive considering you asked the question, some people have said its reasonable and other have said why not do it yourself.

 

 

Huh? How do you work out "aggressiveness" from a post??  I'm wanting answers based on others having to insulate their rental property, not random stabs in the dark.

mattwnz:

 

chimera:

 

mattwnz:

 

Why not higher than R 2.9 for the ceiling? You can go up to around R 6, considering most of the heat loss is through the ceiling. I would also install glass insulation in the ceiling, as it tends to be one of the only types of insulation you can go over  IC downlighters with. Otherwise you end up with holes in teh insulation for the light fittings.

 

 

Because its a rental property and I'm simply dealing with the new requirements that will be coming out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is no reason to do it to the minimum though, and the standards will rise over time, which may mean relaying another layer in the future.  Fibre glass is also probably cheaper than polyester, so you should get more R value for your buck. It does mean that your occupants will be in a  warmer healthy home, which potentially means less mould too, so less maintenance, and looks like your current tenants health problems would benefit from it. So it shows some good faith from you to do this.  So potentially worth your while doing it to a higher standard, than just the bare minimum.

 

Because I'm not providing a social service?

I have no problem adhering to the minimum requirement, and this minimum is the same level of insulation in the roof and underfloor as my own home (in fact, my own home has less, as half my house doesn't have underfloor insulation yet)  I agree with the fact that homes should be warmer for everyone, especially those with small kids and this is the reason I'm pushing this hard with another one of my properties because the tenant has small children and she has asthma (as do I) so know what its like in the cold. I therefore don't mind providing insulation to the set standard to *maintain* the heat in, and they can just use an alternate form of heating like everyone else to provide a desired level of comfort.

Other than that, a tenant has the choice of selecting a home to move into - they assess the house on its merits (and downsides) and THEY can choose to apply for it or not. Clearly insulated properties with heat pumps are going to be more attractive to those that don't - but that equals more cost. Likewise, more than the minimum standard equals even more cost and therefore makes this less of a viable business (and yes its a business - like any other business the money, risk, time is all on the owner)  Obviously I want to aim for a healthy more maintenance free home - benefits both the tenant and myself.

Anyways the point of the post in the first place is querying the cost of insulation - which I simply think is excessive. I'm specifically asking others who have been in the same boat and what pricing they have had to pay to get this done. I'm basically assessing the total cost less the insulation and whats left is largely labour, and to me this seems very high. Or maybe its simply due to higher demand so they generally get to charge what they want at the moment?