In the CAE system, a saving has an owner. Before filing an application you must be able to prove who generated it and who transfers it for monetisation. When the building is leased, the equipment is rented or the works run under an energy performance contract, that point stops being obvious and must be settled in writing.
Why ownership is the critical point
An application does not only certify that a saving occurred: it certifies who owns it and in whose favour it is monetised. If the documentation does not establish that clearly, verification stops, even when the technical calculation is correct.
This is the most frequent blocker in corporate projects, because the investment, the property and the consumption often sit with three different parties.
The four usual situations
Each contractual structure requires different treatment before filing.
In all of them the test is the same: the application must be able to prove, with documents, who generates the saving and who transfers it.
| Situation | Who invests | What to document |
|---|---|---|
| Owner-occupied | The owner itself | Invoices in its name and ownership of the supply point. |
| Leased building | Landlord or tenant | Agreement between parties allocating the saving and authorising its transfer. |
| Equipment on rental or leasing | Finance provider / lessor | Clause clarifying who the saving generated by the equipment belongs to. |
| Energy performance contract | The energy service company | Split of the saving and of certificate revenue inside the contract. |
Minimum content of the transfer agreement
There is no single template, but an agreement usable in an application must settle these points.
The more specific the agreement — measure, dates, equipment — the fewer questions it will raise during verification.
- 01
Identification of the parties and the property
Full tax details, address and cadastral reference where one exists.
- 02
Description of the measure
Measure carried out, equipment, execution dates and the expected applicable sheet.
- 03
Allocation and transfer of the saving
Express statement of who owns the final-energy saving and in whose favour it is transferred.
- 04
Exclusivity and no duplication
Commitment not to transfer the same saving to a third party or file it in another application.
- 05
Economic split
How certificate revenue is shared between the parties, where applicable.
- 06
Documentary cooperation
Commitment to provide invoices, datasheets and access for the photographic report.
Before signing
This guide is informational and does not replace legal advice. We review at no cost how your contractual structure fits the application requirements.
Mistakes that block an application
Most are avoidable if the agreement is signed before the works, not after.
None of these points is technical: they are all solved with documentary discipline and an early decision on who monetises the saving.
- Agreement signed after execution. Better to close it beforehand: reconstructing ownership afterwards complicates the paperwork.
- Invoices in the name of another group company. Mismatch between invoicing and the declared owner is a common trigger for review.
- Double transfer of the same saving. The same kWh cannot be certified twice; an express declaration helps.
- Agreement with the measure and dates identified. A generic agreement with no specific measure loses evidential value.
How it works in practice
In most corporate projects the transfer agreement is not a standalone document: it is folded into the main works, lease or energy service contract through a specific addendum. That integration avoids contradictions between documents, which is exactly what verification spots fastest.
Timing matters as much as content. Signing before execution aligns the technical scope, the dates and the ownership with what will later be declared. Signing afterwards forces you to reconstruct the project history from documents never drafted for that purpose, and every reconstruction opens one more question in review.
In corporate groups, check who invoices and who consumes. Often a property company owns the building, another operates the business and a third holds the supply contract. None of that blocks an application, but it does require writing down which entity owns the saving and how it is transferred.
In energy performance contracts, the split of certificate revenue should be as clearly defined as the split of bill savings. If the contract is silent, the project can still be filed, but the later negotiation between the parties usually delays the application more than any administrative step.
Our practical recommendation is simple: before signing, review the draft with the applicable sheet in front of you. Confirming that dates, the description of the measure and the identification of the property match what will be declared saves weeks of corrections.
Where a measure covers several properties, an agreement per project — or an annex identifying each property with its cadastral reference — works better than one generic portfolio document. That individual identification is what links each saving to its application.
And if the project is financed through rental or leasing, raise the ownership question at the offer stage. Adding that clause while negotiating the equipment is straightforward; adding it after signature depends on the finance provider's goodwill.
It also helps to keep one short summary sheet per project listing the parties, the property, the measure, the execution dates and the applicable sheet. Reviewers read that page first, and a clear summary usually prevents the round of questions that would otherwise arrive two weeks later.
Finally, remember that the agreement is evidence, not paperwork for its own sake. Every clause that makes ownership, exclusivity and the economic split explicit reduces the risk of a project stalling once the works are already paid for and the equipment is running.