Cavity Wall Insulation (CWI)

At the time of writing, the methodology for EPC assessments of existing dwellings is RDSAP 10. A significant methodology overhaul from RdSAP to the Home Energy Model (HEM) is proposed for 2027. In addition, government consultations indicate future changes to the format of EPCs and minimum rating levels required for private rental properties. Methods for improving EPC ratings will therefore change in the future.

On this page we'll explain how cavity walls are assessed, how assessors identify the presence of retrofitted insulation, and how much improvement you might expect to see in an example EPC rating.

In many homes with previously unfilled cavity walls, retrofitting cavity wall insulation can improve the EPC rating. The amount of improvement varies, however, depending on the property's construction, heating system and other energy-efficiency measures.

A Cavity Wall is generally where the external wall of a property is constructed as two masonry walls very close to each other with a gap between them called the cavity.

The outer wall is often constructed with bricks, and the internal wall often constructed using larger blocks.

Here is an example in my neighbour's modern extension:

The external brick wall, and the internal block wall are clearly visible, with the gap (cavity) inbetween - in this case fully filled with insulation.

A cavity wall is determined in many cases by looking externally at the brick bond of the wall (how the bricks were laid when the wall was built) and considering the thickness of the wall, perhaps the age of the property and maybe the view of an end gable wall from inside the loft to support this choice.

The brick bond of a cavity wall is normally such that all the bricks are laid lengthways. The long side of a brick is called the 'stretcher', and ordinarily you will only see stretchers across the external face of a cavity wall. Additionally, the thickness of the wall is likely to be around 275mm or slightly more.

In comparison, a solid brick wall is usually constructed with bricks laid both lengthways and also across the depth of the wall, with the wall being two (or possibly three) bricks thick. As you look at the external elevation of the property you'd expect to see a mixture of long faces of the bricks and also the shorter (end) faces of the bricks. These end faces are called 'headers'. The thickness of this type of wall is likely to be around 225mm or possibly 345mm (for a two brick thick solid wall and a three brick thick solid wall).

There are various patterns in which the bricks can be laid, and this example is called English Bond, where a whole row of stretchers is alternated with a whole row of headers.

Note that solid walls consisting of just a single skin of bricks laid end to end in stretcher bond can occasionally be found, but they are only about 115mm thick. Despite the external visual appearance, the thickness measurement would clearly indicate these are not cavity walls.

It's possible to find both cavity and sold brick walls on some earlier properties, and this is the case in this example, originally built sometime between 1905 and 1922:

Notice the brick bond of the main building. It's stretcher only, indicating a cavity wall. This was also supported by measuring the thickness of the wall at a window opening.

Notice though the brick bond of the extension at the rear. The brick bond is headers and stretchers. This indicates a solid brick wall, and this again was supported by measuring the wall thickness at a door opening.

'Modern' UK Building regulations came into force in 1966 (England & Wales), 1964 (Scotland) and 1972 (Northern Ireland).

In the EPC assessment methodology for existing dwellings, consideration is given to construction datebands of building parts, and the timing of these bands vary slightly across the nations. In this section I'll stick with the England & Wales dates as this is where I am located..

Up until 1976, houses were almost entirely built without cavity wall insulation as they did not need it in order to meet the thermal performance required by building regulations.

From 1976, with slightly tighter requirements for thermal performance, it was more usual for builders to partially insulate cavities.

Then from 1983 onwards it was much more normal for cavities to be insulated at the construction stage due to further tightening of the thermal performance requirements.

Despite the above, some dwellings were actually still being built into the early 1990s without cavity wall insulation as their builders could meet the energy requirements by using thermal blocks on the inner skin of the wall instead of installing insulation.

For properties where cavity wall insulation was not installed at the time of construction ('as built'), it is possible to have it retrofitted (ie fitted afterwards).

This is usually achieved by drilling a pattern of 20mm or so holes in the mortar lines across a wall, injecting the insulation through the holes, and then capping the holes with mortar.

If you have a property with an un-filled cavity wall, having insulation retrofitted into the cavity will result in a better EPC rating, so for us here where we are wanting to improve the EPC rating of our existing building, having CWI retrofitted will usually be the goal.

Having said this however, there are some properties where cavity wall insulation is not appropriate (see notes later).

This example is simply to demonstrate some of the principles we have described so far.

In the following picture, I've removed a single brick from a cavity wall, just at the point where two 1950s terraced houses join, and where one has had cavity wall insulation retrofitted:

This is an interesting photograph because you can see several things here.

The grey colour blocks visible through the hole are the inner wall (leaf) of blocks.

The house to the right has had cavity wall insulation retrofitted, and it is the soft cotton type fluffy insulation. There are other types available, and they all have their own pros and cons.

We can't quite see enough in this photo to be sure, but the house to the left in fact does not have cavity wall insulation.

There is also a barrier that has been installed to keep the insulation in the walls in the house on the right. This is the red brush like fitting, made from a pair of twisted metal cables wound round each other with short lengths of plastic strands caught inbetween them. This runs the complete height of the property.

Also in the photo, we can see the cavity of the party wall which separates the two properties. This reveals that the party wall is a cavity wall, rather than being a solid wall, and it is not insulated.

We're going to cover an area here that is frequently mis-understood by homeowners when looking at their Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs), in relation to cavity walls.
 

This is evidenced by frequent ill-informed discussion on Internet forums.

When a Domestic Energy Assessor visits your property, they identify the type of external wall, and then choose the insulation status of that wall.

In the case of a Cavity Wall, the standard options for Insulation Status are :

• 'As Built'  - This means that the insulation status of the wall is the same as when it was originally constructed. (i.e. it has not changed, or no documentary evidence is available to prove it has changed).
• 'Filled Cavity' - This means that cavity wall insulation has been retrofitted to the wall, i.e. installed since the wall was originally constructed. Evidence is required to support this.

Notice that this choice is not about whether the cavity is currently filled or not, it is about whether cavity fill has been added since the wall was originally constructed, or not.

This is an important distinction, and as we will see shortly, it is this choice along with the construction dateband assigned to the building part, which determines the level of heat loss this wall contributes in the calculation of the EPC rating.

EPC assessments of existing dwellings are non-invasive by design.

To determine the insulation status of a cavity wall, an energy assessor will stand outside the property and look at the external face of the wall.

If they can see a series of drill holes indicating the presence of retrofitted Cavity Wall Insulation, they will enter the insulation status of the cavity wall in the assessment as: 'Filled Cavity'.

In the absence of these drill holes and any other documentary evidence to indicate that cavity wall insulation has been retrofitted, the cavity wall is recorded with an insulation status of 'As Built'.

(There are also options for combined 'filled cavity' plus 'internal' or 'external' insulation too, if that has also been fitted, but we'll proceed here to consider only 'Filled Cavity').

Specific types of documentary evidence for retrofitted CWI can be accepted if required, and are made available to the assessor. This might include the situation where it is not possible to visually determine that such insulation has been installed since original construction due to the wall having been rendered, re-rendered, or re-pointed, but a certificate is available as proof.

The textual description of cavity walls as shown in the Features table on EPCs causes great confusion to very many people.

When 'Filled Cavity' is selected, the Features table on a resulting EPC will then contain a line that reads:

Wall - Cavity wall, filled cavity

If 'As Built' is selected instead, a slightly different description will appear.

This will include text that verbally indicates to the reader an assumption about the presence of insulation in the cavity wall.

This asumption reflects the most common construction approach in use at the time that the wall was originally built, considering the construction dateband assigned to the building part.

The dates vary slightly by region, but here in England where I am based, if the dateband of the building part is prior to 1976, then the EPC Features table will indicate:

Wall - Cavity wall, as built, no insulation (assumed)

If the dateband of the building part is 1976-1982, then the EPC Features table will indicate:

Wall - Cavity wall, as built, partial insulation (assumed)

If the dateband of the building part is 1983 onwards, then the EPC Features Table will indicate:

Wall - Cavity wall, as built, insulated (assumed)

This choice of 'assumed' insulation is made by the EPC methodology. The Energy Assessor does not control this themselves, it is purely controlled by the assessment methodology and is based on the construction dateband applied to the building part when 'As Built' is chosen for a cavity wall.

Behind the scenes, the EPC assessment methodology includes the wall in calculation of the EPC rating.

It represents the thermal performance of the wall by use of a 'u-value'.

This is a numerical representation of heat loss and it is measured in Watts per metre squared, Kelvin (W/m2K).

This relates to how much power (Watts) is lost through each square metre area of the wall, per degree Kelvin (same unit size as Centigrade) temperature difference from one side of the wall to the other.

By default, this value is not actually measured by an energy assessor onsite, but the assessment methodology selects a value from a fixed reference table of u-values, and it is determined by:

• Region (England/Wales/Scotland/NI)
• Wall Type (Cavity in this case)
• Insulation status (eg As built or Filled Cavity)
• Construction dateband

For those that are interested, the tables of default U values are available to view in the RDSAP 10 Specification document on the Building Research Establishment (BRE) website.

To locate this document, visit the folllowing website:

https://bregroup.com/expertise/energy/sap/sap10

Scroll down and click on the link for 'RdSAP 10 Specification 10-06-2025' (or a newer version if listed).

The values are located in:

• Table 6 - for England
• Table 7 - for Scotland
• Table 8 - for Northern Ireland
• Table 9 - for Wales

Here are the cavity wall U values for England (my location) from Table 6 with the English datebands, for 'As Built' and Filled Cavity':

* = assumed 'As Built'

So by default, the EPC calculation proceeds with a chosen u-value from this table, and it is here where the real assumption is made.

For recent datebands, the values are based on the minimum U values required by Building Regulations at the time.

For older datebands they are based on research by the BRE of walls constructed using the most common methods at the time.

So the real assumption being made here is your cavity wall was built to the minimum thermal performance required by building regulations at the time (1966 onwards) or to the most common construction practice at the time (pre 1966).

There's therefore no 'scam', this process has been thought through carefully, and everything is working as it should in the vast majority of cases, unless you really do think your house has been built entirely differently for some reason.

It is important to be aware that the u-value can also be manually overidden by the energy assessor but that documentary evidence is required to do so, and the requirements on acceptable evidence is very tight.

This would be used in the case where a house has been constructed to performance levels significantly better than building regulations at the time, such as a Passivhaus.

With the default U values from the table being dependant on the dateband assigned to the building part, it is therefore important that the correct dateband is assigned to by the assessor, and I think that this particular point is the cause of much mis-understanding in online forums, because it changes the textual assumption indicated on the EPC.

If the wrong dateband is applied then the EPC rating can be skewed slightly one way or another because of a slightly different default u value being used. However, it's the textual description of the wall in the Features table on the EPC certificate that people actually see, notice, and make factually incorrect comments about when it doesn't match their expectations.

Linked to this, notice in passing that if the Energy Assessor mistakenly records the wall as 'Filled Cavity' even though there is no evidence of the insulation having been retrofitted rather than having been there since original construction ('As Built'), then the EPC calculation will use a better U value than it should for construction dates just prior to 1996, and the rating will come out overly positive.

To illustrate this, consider the case of a cavity wall built in 1989. The prevalant construction method at the time was to build that wall with insulation in the cavity. The wall would have been built to at least minimum building regs at the time. In the absence of drill holes on the outside of the wall, the assessor should choose 'As Built' and the u-value chosen by the methodology would be 0.6. However if the assessor chooses 'Filled Cavity' instead, even though there is no evidence that cavity fill has been retrofitted, then the chosen u-value would be 0.35 which is significantly better.

This could happen where a property has no evidence of retrofitted cavity insulation, such as fill holes in the external brickwork, but the owner presents proof to the assessor that the wall does actually have insulation in it. Insulation may be visible for example via core drill holes made whilst fitting appliances, albeit this insulation dates from original construction of the property. Forgetting the distinction, and in the presence of an excited owner, the assessor proceeds to wrongly declare the wall as 'Filled Cavity', forgetting this actually means retrofitted CWI, rather than declaring it correctly as 'As Built'.

Finally as we finish this section, I just want to reiterate again, the 'assumed' cavity wall insulation status as displayed in the Features table on an EPC is just a noticeable, secondary 'visual' sign which indicates the choice of a construction dateband either side or around the 1976-1982 range (E&W) for a cavity wall with insulation status of 'As Built'.

CIGA, the Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency, is an independent body estabished in 1995 that provides 25 year guarantees for retrofitted Cavity Wall Insulation fitted by registered installers in the UK.

If your property has had CWI retrofitted since 1995, it is quite possible that you could purchase a duplicate certificate from CIGA confirming the presence of CWI, if you need to prove it.

In most cases it would not be necessary to present such a certificate to your energy assessor because the insulation fill holes would be visible on the outside of your property, but there are some circumstances where a certificate would definitely help.

This would be the case where since having retrofitted CWI, your property has been:

• re-pointed - where the mortar between the bricks is ground out and replaced with fresh mortar
• rendered - where the brickwork has had a smooth coat of render applied to the outside
• re-rendered - where an external render coat has been removed and a fresh one applied

In each of these cases, the once visible fill holes would no longer be present, and an energy assessor would otherwise have to describe the insulation status of the wall as 'As Built'.

There is no online search facility on the CIGA website (such as the one present on the FENSA website for glazing installations), but they indicate that you can contact them directly to enquire whether a certificate is available for your property. If a certificate is available, then for a fee they can provide a copy of it to you. Their website is at:

https://ciga.co.uk/

Consider for a moment the situation where:

• You home was built with an external cavity wall in 1976 or later, perhaps even up into the 1990s as described above (England & Wales datebands).
• From invasive inspection, perhaps using a borescope, you identify that the cavity is empty - because the builder met the thermal performance requirements of building regulations at the time by using thermal blocks to construct the inner wall, rather than installing CWI.
• Although the wall met building regulations at the time, you would like to install cavity wall insulation now to make the thermal performance of the wall even better.
• You would like to apply for a grant of some sort to help pay for the cavity wall insulation.
• As part of the requirements of your chosen grant scheme, you need a currently valid EPC, and the scheme expects the EPC to identify that the cavity wall is not filled.
• You either commission a new EPC, or perhaps have an existing one, and the assessor has followed the rules properly and recorded the insulation status of the wall as 'As Built', but due to the construction dateband of the building, the RdSAP methodology indicates on the EPC that the wall is 'insulated (assumed)' or 'partially insulated (assumed)', even though it isn't.

This is an interesting situation because firstly, you have an outstanding opportunity:

You have a cavity wall that met the building regs at the time, and the EPC rating was calculated using the building regs minimum U value for that dateband. In terms of the modelled performance of the wall in the EPC, this will match that of another similar building constructed at the same time but where CWI was originally fitted.

As a result, the EPC rating is 'correct', but you now have the ability to relatively cheaply add CWI to further increase the thermal performance of the wall, whereas the other property with CWI already fitted would have to revert to Internal or External wall insulation to make any improvement, and that would come at a much greater cost, and require more effort to install.

Secondly though, you might have a dilema because, the form of grant funding you want to apply for is expecting your EPC to say your cavity wall is 'uninsulated (assumed)'.

This situation is described in a technical bulletin from the accreditation scheme I am a member of, and they indicate:

"Where a cavity wall has been built post 1976, but inspection by borescope reveals that the cavity is void, a Structural Engineer's Report or report from a qualified body is needed for submission with the EPC when applying for some forms of grant funding. The supplementary report is required to prove suitability of the dwelling for CWI in view of the automated EPC text which cannot be overwritten. The actual build-date must be input accurately and NEVER back-dated to indicate a void cavity".

We've discussed above how RDSAP by default will select a u-value for the external walls of each building part of your property from a look-up table, and then use these values in the overall calculation of the EPC rating.

The u-value selected depends on Region (Scotland/England/Wales/NI/Isle of Man), Wall Type (Cavity in the case here), Insulation Status (As Built/Filled Cavity), and importantly: Construction Dateband.

The behaviour described above is absolutely fine for the vast majority of existing dwellings because the exact actual u-value of the walls will not be known, and the tables offer a useful way of providing a u-value to use in the calculation based on typical construction practices at the time, or minimum building regulation requirements for the more recent construction datebands.

This means that an assessment for an EPC on an existing dwelling will generally not require invasive examination and therefore the cost of that assessment is kept low.

There are cases however where a property is built with thermal performance that is better than either typical practice at the time, or better than building regulations required at the time.

In these cases, if RdSAP selects a u-value from the tables then it will generally result in a worse rating than could be obtained if accurate u-values of the building components were entered.

One scenario where this can be determined easily is in the case of a property, built or converted sometime since late 2008 onwards. This is around when EPCs were first introduced.

Properties constructed since this time have required a full SAP EPC in order to pass building control requirements, and they are based on accurate engineering information about the materials and construction techniques used.

Full SAP EPCs display the u-value for walls, floors and roofs in the features table, and an interested owner would be able to compare those with the u-values that RDSAP would otherwise pull from the lookup tables and spot any significant difference.

Another more extreme example of this situation is the case of properties built to the Passivhaus standard.

They are built with thermal performance significantly better than the minimum required by building regulations, and owners of this type of buildings are likely to be very interested in using accurate, calculated u-values, rather than the default values used from the look-up tables.

The methodology provides for energy assessors to override the u values for various components in an RDSAP EPC assessment, including the walls.

However, there are strict requirements in terms of documentary evidence required to support this.

The overiding of any u-value for any building part, apart from doors and windows, will trigger a 'Smart Audit' on a lodged EPC. This is documented in the DEA Smart Audit Rules document on the EASOB website here: http://easob.co.uk/

Energy Assessors will therefore be very careful to ensure they have sufficient documentary evidence to support the overiding of any u-value because their professional accreditation may be at risk if such documentation is deemed to be insufficient.

The requirements of documentary evidence for overiding u-values is detailed in the RDSAP Conventions document available here: https://bregroup.com/expertise/energy/sap/sap10.

In Convention 3.08, is reads as follows:

"The U-values of existing elements (walls/roofs/floors, etc.) must be the RdSAP default values (e.g. entered “as built”) and must not be overwritten unless specific documentary evidence of the thermal conductivity of individual materials of the building element of the property being assessed is provided and was undertaken in accordance with BR 443 “Conventions for U-value calculations” (BRE, 2006).

The U-value is that of the whole element, including any added insulation.
Documentary evidence applicable to the property being assessed (see convention 9.02) must be provided and recorded if overwriting any default U-value. This evidence shall be either:

• Relevant building control approval, which both correctly defines the construction in question and states the calculated U-value; or

• A U-value calculation produced or verified by a person with suitable expertise and experience.

Evidence of suitable expertise and experience can be demonstrated by, but is not limited to, membership of a recognised U-value calculation competency scheme or OCDEA1 or Level 4 non-domestic energy assessor membership, or any other process recognised by Accreditation Schemes/Approved Organisations and Government.

Where it is known that only part of an element has been insulated use the alternative wall if possible for the insulated part, or use extensions"

The ability for a homeowner to provide this level of documentary evidence is very rare, as this information is not normally passed on to the homeowner when a new-build property is initially sold.

It is however possible to obtain u-value calculations via instrusive examination of an existing building by appropriately qualified and insured persons, and u-value calculations conducted by a suitably qualified person.

Where cavity wall insulation is determined by the RdSAP methodology to be beneficial for a property, a recommendation will be listed on the EPC, advising it to be fitted.

As with all recommendations, this will only appear if the measure increases the SAP rating by at least 1 (one) SAP point (or 0.5 SAP points in the case of cylinder insulation, draughtproofing and low energy lighting).

This particular improvement measure is related to building fabric, and as with other such improvements including loft insulation and floor insulation, it will appear high up on the list of any recommendations on an EPC.

This reflects the expressed desire of the Government for building fabric measures to be implemented first before other types of measure.

This is how a recommendation for cavity wall insulation typically appears on an EPC:

Details relating to all the possible recommendations that can be listed on an EPC are publicly available in section 20 of the RDSAP 10 Specification document linked to above.

The main recommendation for cavity wall insulation (for CWI on its own) is considered when:

• An unfilled cavity wall is present (assessed as "As Built" and not "Unknown")
• The wall is suitable for cavity insulation (This might not be the case if the assessor selects addendum for 'cavity less than 50 mm', 'high exposure' or 'difficulties of access')

The recommendation is triggered if:

• The wall U-value as assumed from RdSAP tables or entered manually by an assessor is > 0.7 W/m2K

The EPC rating that's indicated after inclusion of the recommendation is calculated with:

• Insulation status: Filled Cavity (ie u-value taken from the Filled Cavity column)

Curiously, some specifics in this recommendation changed when RDSAP 10 was released in June 2025.

Prior to this, under RDSAP 9.94, the U value trigger was >0.6 W/m2K rather than 0.7.

This change in trigger value doesn't affect triggering of the recommendation when default u-values are taken from the lookup tables by RDSAP. It looks like it would only affect the triggering when manually overidden u-values are entered.

Secondly, the following difference was in effect between 15th June 2025, when RdSAP 10 was introduced, and 7th June 2026, when RdSAP was further updated to 10.0.01:

When a recommendation for cavity wall insulation appeared on an EPC certificate, the increased rating with that measure implemented was calculated using a fixed u-value of 0.55 W/m2K rather than the default u-value from the 'Filled Cavity' column.

This meant the improved EPC rating indicated for CWI installation, may not have matched the actual rating attained if a further real RDSAP EPC was actually conducted after CWI install.

It was possible for the recommendation to show an over-estimated rating for datebands A to E (because 'Filled Cavity' in the table contains larger u values than 0.55) and under-estimated for datebands F to M (because 'Filled Cavity' in the table contains smaller u-values than 0.55).

This issue was resolved by the update to RdSAP 10.0.01, reverting to the previous behaviour.

In the example of our Case Study 1 property, a 1950s double-fronted terraced house, the EPC rating would improve as follows when cavity wall insulation is installed:

This improvement of 4 SAP points is quite a useful improvement in this case.

To learn what difference could be made to your EPC rating, check with a local energy assessor before proceeding with any work, because various characteristics of a property affect the amount of gain experienced, and it is likely to be different to this example.

It's always best to make choices from a position of certainty when trying to improve your EPC rating, because this will avoid spending money unnecessarily.

A local Domestic Energy Assessor is the best person to work with to help work out the best changes to make.

Retrofitted Cavity Wall Insulation (CWI) is not appropriate for all properties.

Advice should be sought when seeking to have cavity wall insulation installed.

My own property has concrete Finlock guttering which has a propensity for water leakage down into the cavity. We therefore need to have the Finlock cut off and replaced with PVC guttering before we have Cavity Wall Insulation fitted.

There are other scenarios too. Properties that are exposed to significant weathering such as on the coast, particularly in the South West of Britain might not be suitable.

This is due to the liklehood of moisture penetration into the cavity through the external brickwork from driving rain.

Another cause for caution might be a property built around a steel frame. Many such buildings were constructed shortly after the second world war. In EPC terms, this is a form of 'System Build' property, and with a steel frame within the cavity wall, specialist advice should be sought.

Some precautions may need to be taken when installing CWI, to mitigate/prevent unexpected condensation within the property afterwards. This may include the adequate provision of trickle vents in windows, or if necessary some form of Mechanical Ventilation.

You may also want to consider removing any rubble from the bottom of your cavities to prevent unwanted thermal bridging prior to the retrofitting of CWI.

A homeowner can check the entry in their Features table and see if the insulation status of their cavity wall matches their expection of what it should be. Mistakes in EPCs can occur, particularly in relation to construction datebands applied to building parts.

Do you know the exact year of construction of your property and any extensions? If the construction dates are entered inaccurately by an assessor, then the EPC rating can be affected. Could you possibly provide any proof of the construction date to your assessor when they arrive? They will usually be very grateful for the information, as dating the construction of a property can be tricky.

It's possible for there to be multiple entries in the Features table for Walls. This can occur if: you have extensions that have different wall types to the main part of the building, or, you have 'Alternative Walls' (parts of a wall that are different to the rest of the wall in a building part)
 

Just a precautionary note, if you render over the outside of your property, and cover over the retrofit CWI fill holes which were previously visible, then an energy assessor will not be able to visually confirm that cavity wall insulation was installed after the property was built.

Similarly, if you have your property with a cavity wall re-pointed or re-rendered then the assessor will also not be able to confirm the presence of retrofitted CWI. Unless documentary evidence is available and presented, they will have to enter the walls as 'As Built'.

If you have cavity wall insulation installed whilst you currently own a property, it would be a good idea to keep the documentation safe, and make that documentation available to any future buyer of the property.

Also if you are purchasing a house, enquire whether such documentation is available from the vendor, particularly if the property was constructed prior to 1983 and there are no cavity fill holes visible.

Otherwise, if documentary evidence is still required to prove the presence of retrofitted CWI, it may be possible to contact CIGA (as mentioned above) to see whether a certificate is already available.

As a last resort, in the case of a wall that has been rendered or re-pointed, you could potentially obtain documentation via someone suitably qualified, conducting an invasive inspection of the wall. This could then be presented to an energy assessor as documentary evidence when conducting an EPC assessment.

Taking this to the extreme, the u-value can be overrided in the assessment if a formal u-value calculation is provided. 

Lastly, there are a few properties where wall ties have been retrofitted to a cavity wall for one reason or another. This could be where existing wall ties were missing, or perhaps decayed over time. Retrofitted wall ties can be implemented via drill holes which appear to be very similar to those for Cavity Wall Insulation fill, although the holes are usually narrower, and the pattern of the holes is different. Care should therefore be taken when checking for the presence of CWI fill holes.

• Suitable for many homes typically built from the 1920s onwards.
• Usually one of the most cost-effective EPC improvements.
• Documentary evidence may be required if retrofitted insulation cannot be confirmed.
• Not every cavity wall is suitable for insulation.
• Professional assessment is essential before installation.
• Confirm modelled EPC rating with an energy assessor before implementing

Return to our Improve Your EPC main page, and see if there is another way you could improve your EPC rating