A Gloucestershire father says his life was turned upside down after taking part in a government-backed eco-friendly scheme meant to cut energy bills.
Duncan Hayes, 45, eagerly accepted free upgrades on his cottage through the ECO4 grant, which promised to make his home greener and cheaper to run.
Instead, the works left his period property roofless, damp, and uninhabitable, costing him a staggering £250,000.
Promises of Savings Turn into Structural Chaos
Duncan opted for what he calls “the full works”: loft, solid wall, and cavity wall insulation, plus solar air source heat pumps, all funded at a cost of £35,000 to taxpayers.
But just two years later, his once-charming cottage has become a chaotic building site.
Scaffolding, debris, and waste litter the property, while solar panels on a wonky roof caused it to cave in, and faulty insulation has led to widespread damp and mould.
Duncan believes he was missold inappropriate works, with installers performing rushed surveys solely to secure payment.
“Their profit margin is over 50 per cent,” he told the Daily Mail. “They’re making killer margins under the guise of a free system which is not free at all.
I haven’t been able to work, my house has been completely destroyed. I’ve lost everything.”
Fighting for a Solution That Doesn’t Exist
The company responsible denied liability, insisting Duncan take his complaint to the government’s ECO4 administrators.
After being passed between 20 organisations, with rain pouring into his already uninhabitable home, Duncan had no choice but to repair the roof himself, despite having zero construction experience.
The financial impact has been devastating: £250,000 lost through property damage, loss of earnings, and the inability to use his home.
His daughter, too, has been affected, unable to stay in the damaged property — a heartbreaking outcome for the father who had hoped to provide stability.
Widespread Failings Across Government Schemes
Duncan is far from alone. A recent National Audit Office (NAO) report revealed serious flaws in government energy schemes, including ECO4 and the Great British Insulation Scheme, leaving tens of thousands of homes requiring remedial work.
According to the NAO, 98% of homes with external wall insulation risk damp and mould if left unaddressed, and 29% of homes with internal insulation also need fixing.
Energy Consumer Minister Martin McCluskey has promised repairs at no cost to homeowners, but this only covers faulty insulation, not solar panels or other works that have caused further damage.
Weak Oversight and Suspected Fraud
The NAO report highlighted systemic failures, including poor scheme design, weak oversight from TrustMark (the consumer protection body), and insufficient auditing that allowed installers to “game the system.”
Last year, Ofgem estimated that up to 16,500 homes may have had falsified ECO claims, with payments ranging from £56 million to £165 million.
Construction expert Sherman Webb, with 43 years in the industry, said the scheme was sales-driven, not survey-driven.
“Installers were paid per job, not for doing a proper job,” he explained.
“They’d push solar panels or insulation on homes that weren’t structurally suitable, because it triggered grant money.”
Taking Action and Raising Awareness
Frustrated by the lack of support, Duncan has set up a Facebook group and an organisation called Nature Society for victims to share experiences and seek advice.
Many members are vulnerable, dealing with serious illnesses while facing the fallout of botched eco-upgrades.
“I started this because there is no advocacy or support for homeowners in the ECO4 landscape,” he said.
“Every single body out there is designed to protect installers, not homeowners.
You get more protection buying a fridge than doing something to your home that completely disrupts your life. They’re ripping your life apart.”
Calls for Reform
Following the NAO’s report, head Gareth Davies said the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero must ensure all affected homes are repaired swiftly and reform the system to prevent a repeat.
Until then, homeowners like Duncan continue to battle both financial and emotional losses caused by a scheme that was meant to help, not harm.