An EPC with an incorrect energy class, technical data that do not correspond to the property, or an inspection that was not carried out can affect a significant choice: buying, selling, or renting a home. I want to clarify the central point right away: an incorrect EPC does not automatically generate a right to compensation, but it can form the basis of a claim when the error has caused a concrete and provable financial loss.
You might wonder whether the deed remains valid, whether high utility bills are enough to prove the damage, or whether liability falls on the certifier, the seller, or the landlord. I will explain what this document truly certifies, which errors are relevant, and how to distinguish an administrative irregularity from a loss that can be claimed in civil proceedings.
What the energy certification really indicates
The energy performance certificate, known as the EPC, is a technical document that describes the performance of the building or the individual real estate unit through indicators established by regulations. It shows the energy class, performance indices, and useful information to compare different properties, as well as recommendations to improve their efficiency. It is not a guarantee regarding future utility bills: actual consumption also depends on the use of the home, the climate, the maintenance of systems, and the rates applied by the supplier.
This difference is important. If energy costs turn out to be higher than expectations, it does not automatically follow that the EPC is unreliable. It is necessary to understand whether the certificate contains incorrect data regarding fixtures, surfaces, insulation, systems, or energy services, or whether the higher consumption depends on elements unrelated to the certification. The useful comparison concerns technical data, not just the distance between the estimate and the expense incurred.
The owner must make the EPC available to the prospective buyer or new tenant from the beginning of negotiations and deliver it upon their conclusion. For sales, onerous transfers, and new lease agreements subject to registration, the regulations also provide for a declaration of receipt of the documentation and, in the expected cases, the attachment of the certificate. Sales or rental advertisements must also report the indices and the energy class. Article 6 of Legislative Decree no. 192 of 2005.
The inspection serves to connect the calculation to the actual state of the property. National guidelines regulate the certification procedure and the determination of energy performance; a certificate prepared without adequate checks therefore deserves technical scrutiny. The absence of an inspection is a serious sign, but to obtain compensation it is also necessary to prove what damage resulted from that error. Decree of June 26, 2015 on national EPC guidelines.
When the error in the EPC becomes relevant
Not every inaccuracy carries the same weight. A typo that does not alter the energy indicators and does not affect the negotiation may make it appropriate to correct the document, but it does not prove a compensable loss by itself. A different case arises when the EPC attributes to the property a system that is not present, ignores characteristics that significantly worsen performance, or calculates the class on data that do not correspond to the state of the unit. The concrete effect of the error matters.
The energy class may have influenced the decision to purchase, the agreed price, the choice among multiple properties, or the convenience of a lease. For this reason, the advertisement, the delivered EPC, the messages exchanged, the proposal, the preliminary agreement, and the final contract are relevant. If the energy information was only marginal in the negotiation, it will be more difficult to argue that it caused a loss; if instead it was presented as a decisive quality of the property, the connection may be more significant.
An incorrect EPC does not annul the deed by itself. Current regulations attach specific administrative sanctions to omissions regarding the certificate and contractual declarations, not an automatic nullity of the sale. However, civil remedies remain possible when the inaccurate information has affected consent, the promised qualities, or the economic balance of the agreement. The remedy depends on the relationship between the parties, what was declared, and the damage actually proven.
Calling an EPC “false” is not enough to turn an error into a criminal offense. Technical error, administrative irregularity, and falsity are different planes, with different prerequisites. For those claiming compensation, the essential hurdle remains proving that the document is technically unreliable and that this very unreliability caused economic prejudice.
Who may be liable for the damage
The appointed certifier
If you are the owner who entrusted a technician with drafting the EPC, the problem arises first of all from the professional relationship. The certifier must operate according to criteria and methodologies provided for certification. If they issue an EPC without complying with them, Article 15 of Legislative Decree no. 192 of 2005 contemplates an administrative sanction from 700 to 4,200 euros and communication to the competent professional orders or boards. The sanction does not coincide with compensation: the injured party must separately prove damage and a link to the error. Article 15 of Legislative Decree no. 192 of 2005.
The client's damage may concern the cost of unusable certification, the need to correct advertising already distributed, a compromised negotiation, or other consequences directly traceable to the inaccurate performance. A new EPC with a worse outcome is not enough: it is necessary to verify whether the conditions of the property were already those at the time of the first certificate and whether the second calculation is based on correct data.
Seller or landlord
The seller or landlord is not automatically liable for every error committed by the appointed technician. However, they may assume liability when they provide untrue information, conceal relevant circumstances they know of, promise non-existent performance, or use in the negotiation a certificate whose unreliability they know. The document and the counterpart's conduct must be distinguished: an error by the certifier does not prove, by itself, the owner's awareness.
In a sale, it is necessary to separate the inaccuracy of the EPC from the material defects of the property. A home can be genuinely inefficient and, at the same time, be described by a correct certificate; conversely, the EPC can be erroneous even without a building defect to repair. This distinction also guides the claim: the cost to voluntarily improve efficiency does not always equal the damage caused by erroneous information.
The certifier towards the buyer or tenant
Whoever purchases or rents the property generally has not directly conferred the assignment on the certifier. Direct claims require more articulated proof: it is necessary to demonstrate technically negligent conduct, reasonable reliance on the document, the damage suffered, and the link between the error and the loss. The mere fact of having received an inaccurate EPC does not yet clarify who should pay and what amount can be claimed.
Damage must be proven, not merely hypothesized
The causal link is the bond between the error and the loss suffered. In the case of the EPC, it means being able to explain, with verifiable elements, that without the erroneous certification you would have bought at a different price, would not have concluded on the same conditions, would have chosen another property, or would have avoided a specific expense. The class difference is not yet the measure of the damage.
Utility bills can be useful, but they are not complete proof. It is necessary to distinguish higher expenses depending on the real performance of the property from those caused by the way the home was used, the number of occupants, seasonal temperatures, energy prices, or subsequent breakdowns. A technical report can clarify whether the original EPC omitted or misrepresented elements already existing at the time of the sale or lease.
Preserving evidence before work begins is decisive. The original EPC, the advertisement, communications, the proposal, the deed or lease contract, system booklets, invoices, and photographs make it possible to reconstruct what was represented. If urgent work is necessary, it is useful to document the previous state; after replacing a boiler, windows, or insulation, it may become more difficult to prove what the situation was at the time of the agreement.
A new certificate may bring out a divergence, but it is more persuasive if it explains the data used, the characteristics detected, and the technical reason for the different class. The verification must be comparable: a new calculation based on work performed after the purchase does not necessarily prove that the first EPC was erroneous when it was issued.
Correcting the document, requesting an inspection, or taking legal action for damages
Correcting or replacing the EPC is often the first useful step when the property needs to be used in a new negotiation, a lease, or a future sale. Correcting the certificate solves the documentary problem, but it does not establish by itself who should reimburse costs already incurred nor does it quantify a loss derived from the previous certification.
Control by the competent authority can also be relevant. Regions and autonomous provinces carry out checks on the quality of the certification service: they can concern documents, the consistency of data and calculations, as well as the inspection of the building. Public control and civil claims are distinct: the former can ascertain an irregularity, while the latter also requires proof of damage and causal link. Article 5 of Presidential Decree no. 75 of 2013.
A claim for compensation requires instead defining with precision the contested fact: which data of the EPC is incorrect, which subject is liable for it, what loss resulted from it, and with which documents it can be proven. It is not wise to confuse the planes: an administrative sanction does not ensure compensation, while a civil claim can be unfounded even if the certificate presents an irregularity devoid of economic consequences.
Facts that can change the answer
The date of the contract, the delivery of the EPC, and the discovery of the error can change the framework of the claim. Actions related to the sale, professional default, and tort liability do not necessarily follow the same prerequisites or the same terms. It is not prudent to wait without reconstructing the facts, especially if work that modifies the property or systems is planned.
It also matters to understand whether the EPC was still usable, whether there were building or plant engineering interventions before or after issuance, and what information was provided in advertising. An expired certificate and an erroneous certificate are different problems: the first concerns the temporal validity of the document, the second the correctness of data and calculation. They can coexist, but require different verifications.
To prepare an initial review, it is useful to gather the received EPC, the advertisement, the contract, relevant messages, system data, and any subsequent technical document. The sequence of documents matters, because it allows distinguishing the original characteristics of the property from modifications that occurred after the sale or lease.
Frequently asked questions
Can I obtain compensation if the EPC reports a wrong energy class?
Yes, if you also prove concrete damage. The incorrect class must derive from technically inaccurate data or calculations, and it must be linked to an economic loss, such as a price influenced by the information, costs caused by the certification, or a compromised negotiation. The mere difference between two certificates is not enough without clarifying why it exists and what consequence it produced.
Does an erroneous EPC render the sales contract void?
No, not automatically. The discovery of the error does not overturn the deed by itself. However, different remedies may exist if the inaccurate energy information significantly affected the decision to buy, the price, or the qualities of the property represented in negotiations and in the contract.
Do higher utility bills than expected prove that the EPC is false?
No, because real consumption depends on multiple factors. The EPC does not guarantee an identical future expense for every home. It is necessary to verify systems, the building envelope, data used in the calculation, property use, maintenance, climate, and energy tariffs. Utility bills gain relevance if technical verification links them to a pre-existing error in the certificate.
Is the certifier liable even if I did not commission them?
It can happen, but the proof is different. If you are a buyer or tenant, you must prove that the certifier acted in a technically incorrect way, that you relied on the EPC, and that that error caused you economically identifiable damage. The original professional relationship with the owner is not enough, by itself, to define your claim.
Can I claim the cost of energy efficiency works?
Not automatically. Works can improve a genuinely inefficient property, but their cost does not always coincide with the damage from an erroneous EPC. A distinction must be made between the expense for an improvement chosen by the owner and that necessary to remedy a situation that was concretely represented in an inaccurate way during sale or lease.
A documented comparison before claiming damages
If you believe that the energy certification is false or erroneous, start from proof of the error and its consequence. Keep the original document and the acts of the negotiation, have it clarified with verifiable data whether the class or indicators were wrong, and separate the property defect from the inaccuracy of the EPC. When the document has affected price, purchase, or lease, you can contact me to evaluate which responsibilities and which claims are truly sustainable.