Although the private sector has expressed their interest in PPP and some subcontracts are already signed with ESCO's, it has been difficult for the private sector to see substantial benefits. The contract between ESCO and ACSeP in the current system of relationships (Maintenance and Savings option) is weak in legal terms. It is hard to enforce from both sides, as it is more of a gentlemen's agreement than an actual contract. The disconnection of obligations and cash flows is a source of this major weakness.
Private companies did not receive yet enough freedom of action, being a subcontractor of MUP's. Their risks are high, while the compensation is uncertain. Private ESCO companies should have either competed with MUP's on equal terms, or MUP's should have had clear contracts with residents.
Direct competition between private ESCO companies and MUP's is difficult as managers of ESCO companies find the price on entering the market too high. In order to sign contract with residents of a particular building, it is necessary to carry out an evaluation of all assets that are to be managed by ESCO. This is a costly procedure especially when the full information on the asset conditions or even the assets itself is inaccurate or just absent. MUP's that are operating these assets do not have to carry out evaluations, as they are operating not on the basis of the contract with residents.
Thus far, only a limited number of ESCO's are delivering services to residents in the target area.