TrustMark consultation - Which? response

Consumer protection in the home improvements sector is in urgent need of reform. Home improvements has the highest level of detriment of any UK sector with an estimated total net monetised detriment of £10.3 billion annually (Consumer Detriment Survey, National Centre for Social Research, 2024). These longstanding and serious failings highlight the need for wide reaching systemic change.

In principle we are supportive of several of the reforms that TrustMark is proposing, including the proposal to create a single front door for consumers who are unable to resolve a dispute with a trader and for consumers to have a single point of contact for handling their complaint. We also welcome measures to improve accountability and reduce duplication in the sector. However at this stage, we are unable to give the proposals our full support without more information as to how they will work alongside other reforms that are being proposed for the sector, and more information about how they will be delivered.

1. Coordination with government and other organisations

Consumer protection in home improvements is overly complex and fragmented. The proposals in this consultation go some way in trying to address this complexity but we strongly encourage TrustMark, the government and other organisations in this sector, to work together to address this complexity by delivering a simpler and better coordinated consumer protection landscape.

TrustMark’s consultation follows the DESNZ consultation on reforming consumer protections for home improvement schemes, the launch of the new MCS installer scheme, and recent government announcements about the role of CTSI approved schemes. The government is also introducing reforms in the wider building and construction sector and has longer term plans to overhaul the wider consumer protection landscape. It is important that these different initiatives are coordinated and result in a system that is easy for consumers to navigate and that efficiently delivers good consumer outcomes. We are concerned that without greater coordination, these reforms will be a wasted opportunity to address the fragmentation of the sector.

We are aware that coordination is the responsibility of the government and all the actors in this sector. As the government endorsed quality scheme, TrustMark has an important part to play in this discussion and in particular needs to ensure that scheme providers' role is realistic and agreed with them.

2. A clear focus on consumer outcomes

TrustMark should put the delivery of positive consumer outcomes at the heart of the scheme. It should have clear definitions of the outcomes it wants to achieve and ensure it is collecting evidence that enables it to measure its progress in meeting those outcomes.

For example, we encourage TrustMark to proactively seek consumer feedback on the work that is done by traders. This will encourage consumers that may not know how to provide feedback or do not have the confidence to do so. Where possible, TrustMark should also measure the performance of measures that have been installed. This is possible with renewables and insulation but could also be extended to other equipment. Consumer feedback and performance data should be used to inform the development of a smart auditing system.

3. A simplified consumer journey

We welcome the principle of there being a single front door for consumers and case management of consumer complaints where the complaint can’t be resolved with the trader. This should ensure consumers understand how to get support for the resolution of complaints and are not passed between different organisations.

However in order for this approach to be successful there must be coordination with government and other organisations to ensure multiple initiatives don’t result in consumers facing multiple front doors. There must also be clear processes and systems of accountability ‘behind the scenes’ so complaints can be resolved efficiently and effectively. For a “front door” to work, consumers must be made aware of it and there must be the capacity and skills to handle, what could be, a large number of complaints.

4. Transparency and accountability

Accountability and transparency are critical for developing a system that has the confidence of consumers and other stakeholders. We welcome the commitment to collect more data and share this data with stakeholders. We urge TrustMark to also collect data about its own performance. All data should be made publicly available unless there are justifiable privacy or commercial reasons not to.

We understand that the government has increased its oversight of TrustMark following the failings that took place under the ECO and GBIS schemes. TrustMark should also create a mechanism to ensure independent consumer oversight. This could be through the creation of a governance level post or independent group that has the capacity to investigate issues of concern and the freedom to publish their findings.