This is why the Interprofessional Syndicate of Real Estate Diagnosis, Analysis and Digitization of the Existing (SIDIANE), in favor of the principle of strengthening training, certification and renewal of the control / sanction of professionals in the sector, formulates alternative proposals that are more realistic and more effective than those proposed by the public authorities.
Addressing the subject of ECD only from this angle is very insufficient. Making the ECD more reliable requires activating other levers, starting with the accountability of owners, landlords and real estate professionals in the production of this diagnosis.
SIDIANE has submitted several concrete, well-argued solutions, supported by studies carried out among its members on ECD. Our professional federation deeply regrets that none of its proposals have been put on the agenda of working meetings to improve the reliability of the DPE by the DHUP and its supervisory ministry. This method questions the way in which the political calendar has prevailed over the search for long-term solutions of general interest.
Regarding the proposal of the Government and the DHUP on the training of diagnosticians, SIDIANE welcomes the desire expressed to strengthen the training, certification and renewal of the control / sanction of real estate diagnostic professionals.
SIDIANE is therefore in favor of:
- a reinforcement of initial training, integrating an appropriate balance between theoretical training and practical training;
- standardization of training content and examinations;
- the setting up of an “a priori” Control on Works, oriented towards tutoring, for a diagnostician starting out in the profession;
- the renewal of the certification more oriented "continuous control" versus "practical and documentary examination";
- the strengthening of controls during the cycle as part of an effective, credible and realistic system to implement and absorb.
On the other hand, SIDIANE considers that the proposals of the Government and the DHUP are not at all adapted and sustainable for real estate diagnosis companies.
SIDIANE finds, according to a study it commissioned among its members, that:
- the overall economic impact for the independent diagnostician or for a company is multiplied by 3;
- the "a posteriori" control as imagined is not, in practice, feasible (making appointments, availability of auditors, impartiality, etc.). SIDIANE proposes instead the implementation of the digital longitudinal control from the ADEME database.
SIDIANE invites the government to take into account all current ECD issues
To produce and draft a reliable DPE, i.e. with an energy label and an assessment of correct GHG emissions, SIDIANE reaffirms that it is urgent to mobilize on two priorities:
Priority 1: Involve all the actors who contribute to the development of ECD, not just the diagnostician.
- the owner who must imperatively provide in complete transparency all the reliable information available to him about his property, which he wishes to sell or rent out. Without this information, it is impossible to produce a reliable ECD;
- indirect prescribers (real estate agents, representatives, even notaries) who must explain to their clients what ECD is and encourage them to “play the game”. The pressure that some could exert on the diagnostician could falsify the results of certain DPEs;
- the major clients (social landlords, communities, real estate departments) who must defend the DPE, cannot continue to award contracts for carrying out this diagnosis with "abnormally low" prices, incompatible with the quality of the services required by a level of purchase price that is consistent and no less attractive;
- the diagnostician, of course, who must be well trained, rigorous and in a guaranteed role of independent trusted third party.
Priority 2: Finalize the reliability of the automated DPE calculation tool.
Contested since its implementation on July 1, 2021, to the point that the new DPE had to be suspended by the Government as a matter of urgency for one month in the fall of 2021, significant improvements have been made. However, there are still substantial anomalies, which penalize certain goods compared to others and thus make the results difficult to read and not understandable by ordering customers.
To meet these two priorities, SIDIANE has already repeatedly formulated the following solutions to the Government and the DHUP and solemnly reiterates them today:
1 solution: the establishment of a completeness index indicated on the first page of the DPE report indicating the ratio between the quantity of information provided by the owner and the total information required to produce a reliable DPE. It is thus a question of involving the owner and the lessor and disengaging the diagnostician if he is unable to carry out his mission correctly. This device should allow the diagnostician to refuse to intervene and to issue an opposable DPE below a certain threshold of completeness. This is all the more crucial as a rise in disputes has been observed. Aren't we heading towards a judicialization of the DPE harmful to the fluidity of the transactional and rental real estate market?
2 solution: the creation of a periodic real estate diagnosis (DIP) to be carried out every 10 years by all owners, for all properties. This diagnosis would have a double advantage:
- it would make it possible to preserve the independence of the diagnostician by rendering useless the attempts at pressure to which the diagnostician is sometimes the object from third parties (owners, professional prescribers of the Diagnoser, etc.);
- it would open up energy renovation to the entire existing building stock: today, a property that does not give rise to either a transaction or a rental is exempt from any obligation or encouragement for renovation.
3 solution: the adoption of company certification for the real estate diagnosis sector as it exists and attests to its effectiveness in other regulatory professions.
Pending a response from the Government, the members of SIDIANE are planning for the DPEs that they will carry out the drafting and delivery of a preliminary DPE report (indicative and non-contractual), suspended upon receipt of additional information required by the owner and mandatory to obtain the edition of the final report of the DPE.
Finally, SIDIANE invites the Government and the DHUP to be aware and to recognize that the excesses leading to the questioning of the reliability of the DPE are also the consequence of the diversion of the very purpose of this diagnosis. Today, the DPE is perceived by a large number of owners as an obligation to carry out a real estate transaction and not as an approach aimed at initiating the renovation programs necessary for the energy transition and the improvement of the ecological footprint of the building. existing French housing stock. Yet it was the deep meaning and laudable ambition of the Climate and Resilience Law at the origin of this new DPE.