Complaining About an Installer: The Escalation Route

Complaining about an installer is not a single act but a sequence, and the sequence differs according to what was installed, who installed it and which scheme or code the firm belongs to. The first step is almost always the same: put the complaint to the installer in writing and give it time to respond. Only when that fails does the route open to a consumer code, a certification body, an ombudsman or an alternative dispute resolution provider.

The timing that matters most is eight weeks. For energy supplier disputes, the Energy Ombudsman expects the supplier to have had eight weeks to resolve the complaint, or to have issued a deadlock letter sooner¹. The same eight-week period applies to domestic and micro business Feed-in Tariff generators², and it remains eight weeks for heat networks³. For installation quality and workmanship, the route runs through the installer's consumer code, such as RECC or HIES, or through MCS installation quality complaints⁴.

What each body can order varies sharply. The Energy Ombudsman can require a supplier to reimburse costs and apply a goodwill credit, as in its one millionth case, where it required £240 in emergency call-out fees to be reimbursed and a £350 goodwill credit applied, with a formal written apology⁵. It cannot punish companies, dictate how they operate or issue fines⁶. Consumer codes work differently again, operating through their own complaints processes and, where relevant, insurance-backed guarantees.

Complaining about an installer: the escalation route at a glance

The route has four broad stages, and which one applies depends on the type of firm and the type of work. The first stage is the installer's own complaints procedure. The second is the scheme or code the installer belongs to, whether that is a competent person scheme, a consumer code such as RECC or HIES, or a certification body such as MCS. The third is an ombudsman or alternative dispute resolution provider. The fourth is the courts, which sit outside all of the above.

For energy supplier matters, the first step is to log a dispute with the supplier¹. For Energy Performance Certificate work, the first step is to speak directly to the Domestic Energy Assessor, and if still unhappy, to contact their certification body⁷. For Feed-in Tariff disputes, the first step is to contact the FIT Licensee, whose complaints process should be set out in the Statement of FIT Terms². For insulation complaints, the TrustMark complaints process applies¹⁰.

Where the complaint concerns installer conduct rather than the installation itself, the route is the installer's consumer code¹¹. Where it concerns installation quality, workmanship or the behaviour of an installer under the Boiler Upgrade Scheme, the complaint goes first to the installer, then to the installer's consumer code, HIES or RECC, or to MCS installation quality complaints⁴. Where a building regulations certificate is missing, the route is the installer's certification body or competent person scheme, or the consumer code if still not satisfied¹¹.

The lens here is straightforward. A household that has installed solar, a heat pump or a battery is trying to reduce its dependence on the grid and on a supplier. The complaints system is one of the few points where that independence is tested: if the installation is faulty and the installer will not fix it, the household is left with equipment it cannot rely on and a route that runs through bodies it did not choose. Knowing the sequence in advance is part of keeping that dependence manageable.

Start with the installer: putting your complaint in writing

Every escalation route in the UK begins with the installer, and the reason is procedural rather than sentimental. Ombudsmen and codes will not normally accept a complaint that has not first been put to the firm, and they ask for the date it was raised. The Energy Ombudsman asks for the supplier's name, the account holder's name, the account number and the date the complaint was first raised¹³. Its case pages repeat the same requirement in the first person: a complainant must have complained to the firm already¹⁴.

The written complaint should state what was installed, when, by whom, what has gone wrong, what remedy is sought and by when. It should be sent by a method that produces a record. The consumer code process expects the installer to have been given at least 10 working days to resolve the matter before the code is contacted⁷. That is a minimum, not a target, and it runs alongside the eight-week period that applies to energy supplier and heat network disputes.

Where the installer is not in an approved competent person scheme, the position is different again. For boiler work in Wales, the firm or the householder will need to give notice to the Local Authority of the intention to carry out the work in advance, and pay a notification fee²¹. That is a building control route rather than a complaints route, but it matters because a missing notification can become the substance of the complaint.

For prepayment meter installation without permission, the supplier should explain why it made its decision, tell the householder when it plans to install the meter, explain what will happen during the installation, and tell them how to contact the supplier if circumstances have changed or the decision is thought to be wrong²². If that handling is unsatisfactory, the Energy Ombudsman can be contacted²². The same principle applies across installation work: the firm's own process comes first, and the record of how it was handled becomes the evidence for everything that follows.

The Renewable Energy Consumer Code: what membership obliges your installer to do

The Renewable Energy Consumer Code, usually shortened to RECC, is one of two consumer protection codes approved by the Chartered Trading Standards Institute for renewable energy work. The other is the Home Insulation and Energy Systems Quality Assured Contractors Scheme, HIES. Membership is not optional for firms in some schemes. Before registering under the Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive, an investor must be a member of RECC or HIES²⁴. Under the Boiler Upgrade Scheme, installers must continue to hold membership with one of the two approved consumer codes to be able to deliver work under the scheme¹².

That matters to a household because code membership is what gives the complaint somewhere to go after the installer. A firm outside both codes leaves the household relying on the certification body, the competent person scheme or the courts. A firm inside a code is bound by that code's complaints process, and the code can require the firm to engage with it.

The codes also sit alongside the certification bodies rather than replacing them. MCS, for example, handles installation quality complaints about its installers. If a complaint is not resolved, the householder can approach the MCS Administrator, who will advise how to make a complaint about the MCS installer². The consumer code and the certification body are two different doors into the same building, and which one is correct depends on whether the problem is conduct, paperwork or workmanship.

For a household pursuing energy independence, code membership is a form of insurance against the installer's own failure. It does not guarantee the work, and it does not remove the need to keep records, but it means there is a body with a published process and a route to escalate. The Renewable Energy Consumer Code page sets out the protections in more detail, and the HIES Consumer Code page covers the deposit and guarantee side.

RECC complaints: how the code process works and what it costs

The RECC complaints process is free to the householder and runs alongside the installer's own procedure. The sequence is: complain to the installer, give them at least 10 working days to resolve it, and if the matter is still unresolved, contact the consumer code⁷. RECC can be contacted by telephone on +44 (0)207 981 0850⁷.

The code's role is to require its members to follow the code, and to investigate where they have not. It is not a court and it does not award damages in the way a court can. What it can do is require a member to put things right, and it can ultimately remove a firm from membership, which matters because membership is a condition of some scheme work. For a household, the practical value is that the code has a published process and a record of the firm's obligations.

The same structure applies to HIES, the other approved code. Which code applies depends on which one the installer belongs to, and a household can check membership before work begins. The RECC complaint page covers the mechanics of raising a case, and the RECC and HIES compared page sets out the differences between the two.

Where the complaint concerns a grant-funded installation, the code route may be specified in the scheme rules. Under the Boiler Upgrade Scheme, complaints about installation quality, workmanship or installer behaviour go first to the installer, then to the installer's consumer code, HIES or RECC, or to MCS installation quality complaints⁴. Under the Green Homes Grant, now closed, the route was installer first, then the installer's TrustMark scheme provider, then an ADR provider or the Dispute Resolution Ombudsman²⁵. That scheme's closure means the route is historical, but it illustrates how scheme rules can add a layer between the installer and the ombudsman.

For a household, the cost of using a consumer code is nil, and the cost of not using it can be the loss of the only body with leverage over a member firm. The code process is not fast, and it depends on the firm still trading. Where the firm has ceased trading, the route shifts to guarantees and scheme providers, which is covered below.

The Energy Ombudsman: when you can escalate and what it can award

The Energy Ombudsman is the dispute resolution body for the energy sector, and its remit covers both domestic and small business consumers⁶. It has helped resolve over one million consumers with their energy complaints, and it describes its service as free, independent support⁵. It can consider complaints about energy suppliers, heat networks and Feed-in Tariff licensees, among others.

The eligibility conditions are consistent across its case pages. A complainant must have complained to the firm already, must have allowed eight weeks for resolution or received a deadlock letter, and must have sufficient evidence including the date the complaint was raised¹⁴. The Ombudsman also asks for the supplier's name, the account holder's name, the account number and the date the complaint was first raised¹³.

What it can award is decided case by case. In its one millionth case, it required the supplier to reimburse £240 for emergency call-out fees paid by the consumer and to apply a £350 goodwill credit to the account, and to provide a formal written apology⁵. That is an illustration rather than a scale. The Ombudsman cannot punish companies, dictate how companies operate or issue fines⁶. Its power is to require a remedy within the dispute, not to sanction the firm.

For heat network customers, the route is slightly different. Consumers should contact their supplier before the Energy Ombudsman, and the heat supplier has eight weeks to resolve the complaint³. The period after which a complaint can be escalated to the Energy Ombudsman remains eight weeks for heat networks³. For Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive matters, the escalation body is different again: the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, via an MP²⁶. That is a route for complaints about the scheme administrator rather than about an installer.

The Energy Ombudsman waiting time page covers the timing in more detail. For a household, the Ombudsman is the last stop before the courts in energy supply and heat network disputes, and it is free. Its limits are as important as its powers: it cannot order a firm to change how it operates, and it cannot fine.

The eight-week rule and deadlock letters: timing your escalation

The eight-week rule is the single most important timing element in the escalation route. For energy supplier complaints, the supplier has eight weeks to resolve the complaint, and if eight weeks pass without a resolution, or the supplier sends a deadlock letter sooner, the dispute can be brought to the Energy Ombudsman²⁷. The Ombudsman's own eligibility wording is that the complainant has allowed the supplier eight weeks to resolve the dispute or has received a deadlock letter allowing earlier escalation¹³.

The same period appears across the Ombudsman's case pages. For heat network complaints, it is at least eight weeks since first raising the issue with the supplier, or receipt of a deadlock letter¹⁴. For Feed-in Tariff generators, if the complaint is still unresolved after eight weeks, it can be escalated to the Energy Ombudsman²⁸. For heat networks under the Energy Bills Discount Scheme, customers can raise a complaint with the Energy Ombudsman for Great Britain and the Consumer Council for Northern Ireland²⁹.

A deadlock letter is the alternative trigger. It is a written statement from the supplier that it considers the complaint closed. Receipt of one allows escalation before the eight weeks have elapsed²⁷. A supplier is not obliged to issue one, so where none arrives, the eight-week route remains the way through. The Ombudsman's case pages phrase the condition as "I've received a deadlock letter OR it has been 8 weeks without my complaint being resolved"¹⁴.

For a household, the practical point is to date the original complaint precisely and to keep proof of when it was sent. The eight-week clock runs from the complaint being lodged, and the Ombudsman asks for that date as part of the case¹³. Where the complaint is about installation quality rather than supply, the eight-week rule does not apply in the same way, and the consumer code or certification body route is the correct one.

What the Ombudsman can and cannot do

The Energy Ombudsman's powers are remedial rather than punitive. It can require a supplier to put something right within the dispute: to reimburse costs, apply a credit, or provide an apology. In its one millionth case, it required the supplier to reimburse £240 for emergency call-out fees paid by the consumer and to apply a £350 goodwill credit to the account, and to provide a formal written apology⁵. That case involved a consumer named Eva from London, and the Ombudsman publicised it as an illustration of the service's twentieth year⁵.

What it cannot do is set out in its own words. It cannot punish companies, dictate how companies operate or issue fines⁶. That distinction matters when a household is seeking a remedy. The Ombudsman can order the firm to compensate or correct, but it cannot order the firm to change its business practices, and it cannot impose a penalty. Where a household wants a firm held to account beyond its own case, the Ombudsman is not the body for that.

The Ombudsman also cannot accept a case that has not been through the supplier first. Its eligibility conditions require that the complainant has complained to the firm already, has allowed eight weeks or received a deadlock letter, and has sufficient evidence including the date the complaint was raised¹⁴. It also requires that the firm named is the correct one to raise the dispute against¹⁷.

For a household, the Ombudsman is a free route to a remedy in a dispute with an energy supplier or heat network, and it is the last stop before the courts. Its limits mean it is not a regulator and not a court. Where the complaint is about an installer's workmanship rather than a supply matter, the consumer code or certification body is the correct route, and the Ombudsman may not be able to take the case at all.

Evidence and record keeping: building the file before you escalate

Every escalation body asks for evidence, and the common requirement is the date the complaint was raised with the firm. The Energy Ombudsman asks for sufficient evidence to support the case, including that date¹⁴. It also asks for the supplier's name, the account holder's name and the account number¹³. For a household, that means keeping the original complaint, the proof of sending, and the firm's responses.

The evidence that matters for an installation complaint is broader than for a supply dispute. It includes the contract, the quote, the performance estimate, the handover documents, the certificates issued after the work, photographs of any defect, and any correspondence with the installer. Where a building regulations certificate is missing, the certification body or competent person scheme should have a record of the installation if it was registered¹¹. That record is itself evidence.

The insurance-backed guarantee page covers what an IBG is and when one is needed, and the installer stopped trading page covers the steps in that situation.

For a household, record keeping is the part of the process that is entirely within its control. The escalation bodies cannot investigate what they cannot see, and the date of the original complaint is the trigger for the eight-week clock. Keeping the file in order from the start is what makes the later stages possible.

Free tools like Resolver: help formulating letters and tracking deadlines

Resolver is a free consumer tool that helps formulate complaint letters and track deadlines. It covers a wide range of companies and organisations, and its coverage is organised by issue type. Its own guidance records that it covers the issue "Debt Related Problem" for 248 companies and organisations, and the issue "Not Yet Raised The Issue With The Firm" for 551 companies and organisations³⁰. Those figures describe the tool's coverage rather than any outcome.

The value of a tool like Resolver is procedural. It helps a household put the complaint in writing, keep a record of when it was sent, and track the eight-week period. It does not replace the escalation bodies, and it does not have any power over the installer. It is a drafting and tracking aid, and its usefulness depends on the household keeping its own records as well.

The wider direction of travel is towards shorter complaint processes. In a parliamentary debate on energy market consumer protection, the government stated that it is shortening the complaints process and making automatic referral to the ombudsman easier³¹. That is a proposed reform rather than a current rule, and it would change the timing described above if implemented. Until then, the eight-week rule and the deadlock letter remain the triggers.

For a household, the tools are optional and the deadlines are not. The eight-week period runs whether or not a tool is used, and the date of the original complaint is what the Ombudsman asks for¹³. A tool can help keep that date visible, but the record is the household's own.

If the installer has ceased trading or the complaint stalls

When an installer ceases to trade, the escalation route changes because the firm can no longer respond. The first alternative is the guarantee. For installation problems where the installer has ceased trading, the contact is the IBG Provider named on the Insurance Backed Guarantee certificate¹¹. For ECO4 and GBIS work, costs of up to £20,000 should be covered by a guarantee when the installer has ceased to trade or failed to remediate⁹. Families affected by faulty ECO4 and GBIS installations should first contact the installer who carried out the installation, and where the installer is no longer trading or unable to remedy damages, they can contact their guarantee provider to initiate a claim³².

The second alternative is the scheme provider. Under the Green Homes Grant, now closed, the route was installer first, then the installer's TrustMark scheme provider, then an ADR provider or the Dispute Resolution Ombudsman²⁵. Under the Boiler Upgrade Scheme, the route is installer first, then the consumer code or MCS⁴. Under the Energy Company Obligation, complaints about an installation go through the ECO4 complaints process³³.

The third alternative is the certification body. Where a building regulations certificate is missing, the route is the installer's certification body or competent person scheme, or the consumer code if still not satisfied¹¹. Where the complaint concerns an MCS installer, the MCS Administrator can advise how to make a complaint².

For a household, the lesson is that the guarantee and the scheme provider are the two bodies that survive the installer's failure. The when an installer goes bust page covers the position in more detail, and the insurance-backed guarantees page covers the guarantee itself. The poor quality installations page covers the defects that most often lead to a complaint.

Where the complaint stalls rather than the installer failing, the eight-week rule is the way through. If the firm has not resolved the matter within eight weeks, or has issued a deadlock letter, the Energy Ombudsman route opens for supply and heat network disputes²⁷. For installation quality, the consumer code or certification body route remains open, and the code can require the firm to engage. The consumer rights for installation work page sets out the underlying rights, and the TrustMark complaint page covers the route for TrustMark registered businesses.