Solar panel rent-a-roof re-mortgage house selling nightmare

[hornetrider]

What a headline I've written there, give me a job at the Wail

Serious story though:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/mar/23/solar-...

Precis: Couple get free solar panels and electricity by renting their roof to a company providing the panels through a popular scheme. Attempt to remortgage and are refused by several mortgage providers.

Implication: house is not mortgagable by many mainstream providers. Disaster!

[Oakey]

No such thing as a free lunch!

ETA: This seems completely logical. If I buy a house and it has rent-a-roof solar panels, why the hell would I want to let some third party make £x amount each year from FIT for a bit of electricity I may or may not gain from?

Article said:

They were promised the free electricity the panels would generate during daylight hours, worth around £150 a year,

Wowsers, £150's worth of electric a year.

Article said:

We signed up to this scheme on the basis that we were doing the green thing, but it has turned out to be a nightmare," says John, who works as an air traffic controller.

Oh the irony!

Edited by Oakey on Thursday 29th March 15:23

[Mojooo]

To be fair when you get these installed the company should get permission from the mortgage lender. If mortgage companies u pand down the coutnry are giving the greenlight for installations then it might be fair to assume that it won't be a barrier to re-mortgaging or selling.

The main point that is usually made is that a new buyer may not wnat to buy a house with panels but tht is a risk you take. Mortgage companies refusing new mortgages on these houses raises a new dimension.

There could be a lot of people in deep st if mortgage companies refuse to offer new mortgages on solar panneled houses with rent a roof schemes.

[Oakey]

Getting permission from the existing lender doesn't appear to be a problem, remortgaging with a new lender who then wants to take on an agreement between two third parties is.

[davepoth]

Mojooo said:

To be fair when you get these installed the company should get permission from the mortgage lender. If mortgage companies u pand down the coutnry are giving the greenlight for installations then it might be fair to assume that it won't be a barrier to re-mortgaging or selling.

The main point that is usually made is that a new buyer may not wnat to buy a house with panels but tht is a risk you take. Mortgage companies refusing new mortgages on these houses raises a new dimension.

There could be a lot of people in deep st if mortgage companies refuse to offer new mortgages on solar panneled houses with rent a roof schemes.

Could be fun when interest rates start to climb, anyway.

[Mojooo]

Oakey said:

Getting permission from the existing lender doesn't appear to be a problem, remortgaging with a new lender who then wants to take on an agreement between two third parties is.

I think the issue is that mortgge leneders dont wnat to take houses with panels because it could be harder to shift them in case of a repossesion and they want rid ASAP.

Whether that would be the case or not, I dunno. Some people may not like the idea of panels and a contract. Others may be happy for the cheaper electrcity costs.

I dont think there are any stats on whether solar powered homes with rent a roof schemes are mroe desirable than those without - yet.

[essayer]

doogz said:

I know a couple of people that have had solar panels fitted to their roofs, but based on average energy production, they've taken out a loan, such that after ten years, they'll have made very little money, but paid the loan off, had some free electricity, and are in for hopefully another 15 years of use from their panels, at their currently agreed, heavily subsidised, rates.

How long do the panels last?

[frosted]

essayer said:

How long do the panels last?

Why is it funny ?

[Steameh]

Horrible little things solar panels and nowhere near as 'green' as people would have you believe. Bloody eyesore too, seems to be a trend around here to get them fitted.

I was under the impression the feed in tarriff is being halved soon as well.

[essayer]

I just think people are getting hoodwinked on a grand scale.

IMO, the panels will pack up after about ten years, the 25 year guarantee will be about as useful as the "lifetime" one you get on a Harveys sofa, and if enough people get these panels (which, judging by my local area, many are jumping on the bandwagon), the government or power companies will put an end to any subsidies.

If you were going to the trouble of putting up panels, I would have thought that a solar hot water system would be a better investment. (Basically a pumped loop through your hot water tank that goes via tubes on the roof)

Edited by essayer on Thursday 29th March 17:18

[frosted]

essayer said:

IMO, the panels will pack up after about ten years, the 25 year guarantee will be about as useful as the "lifetime" one you get on a Harveys sofa, and if enough people get these panels (which, judging by my local area, many are jumping on the bandwagon), the government or power companies will put an end to any subsidies.

If you were going to the trouble of putting up panels, I would have thought that a solar hot water system would be a better investment.

You seriously have no idea what your talking about

[BlueMR2]

doogz said:

essayer said:

doogz said:

I know a couple of people that have had solar panels fitted to their roofs, but based on average energy production, they've taken out a loan, such that after ten years, they'll have made very little money, but paid the loan off, had some free electricity, and are in for hopefully another 15 years of use from their panels, at their currently agreed, heavily subsidised, rates.

How long do the panels last?

25 years, according to the paperwork, which has a 25 year guarantee stapled to it, apparently.

Something funny?

Surely that depends if the company that made large amounts of money is still around to repair or replace them or left with large amounts of money before the bills come in.

[Soovy]

hornetrider said:

What a headline I've written there, give me a job at the Wail

Serious story though:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/mar/23/solar-...

Precis: Couple get free solar panels and electricity by renting their roof to a company providing the panels through a popular scheme. Attempt to remortgage and are refused by several mortgage providers.

Implication: house is not mortgagable by many mainstream providers. Disaster!

The stupidity of the greedy never ceases to amaze me.

Article in the Grauniad said:

The leases run for 25 years, and so would have to be passed on to any buyer. Crucially, they would restrict a mortgage provider if it was forced to repossess.

Therefore lenders won't want to lend on these properties. Duh.

Edited by Soovy on Thursday 29th March 17:41

[Eric Mc]

What is the normal operating life of a solar panel? I know on spacecraft they usually start running out of steam after ten or so years due to degradation. I would expect that a solar panel on the roof of a house in the UK will be even shorter lived due to our weather, birds etc.

[s2art]

Eric Mc said:

What is the normal operating life of a solar panel? I know on spacecraft they usually start running out of steam after ten or so years due to degradation. I would expect that a solar panel on the roof of a house in the UK will be even shorter lived due to our weather, birds etc.

Well, the radiation levels in space are much higher. This causes the panel to degrade faster than on earth. Assuming the panel is well made (protected from water ingress) they merely degrade at approx 1% per year. So, the problem is that after 20 years the panels will be at 80% capacity. The real problem is that the inverters fail much more rapidly. And they are expensive.

[Mojooo]

The lifetime of a panel matetrs differently depending on what deal you have.

1 - if you bought outright you have to rely on the panel makers gurantee or Sale of Goods with the retailer. If the panel breaks the nyou will be losing income

2 - rent a roof, it is in the companies interest to keep the panels working incase of a breakdown as it is their incoem stream. for the householder its no great shakes as they didnt pay for the panel, the only thign is they will not be getting their free electrciity.

If I was i ncategory 1 I woudl be worried about a breakdown after 10 years because chances are the ocmpany will have fked off by then.

[Deva Link]

Oakey said:

Getting permission from the existing lender doesn't appear to be a problem, remortgaging with a new lender who then wants to take on an agreement between two third parties is.

Funny that, isn't it. Your lender give you the OK, knowing that you'll be locked into them for the life of the mortgage!

The other angle to this, even ignoring any mortgage issue, is will people want to buy houses where the roof has been rented out and the householder gets very little benefit? Apart from anything else, it stops them having their own PV installation done.

[andy43]

s2art said:

The real problem is that the inverters fail much more rapidly. And they are expensive.

That. The panels aren't the problem.
Rentaroof is effectively a second charge on the property. Lenders aren't keen on that.
On that basis, ahm oot.

And the second option of buying your own panels, based on the FITs payments?
Would you really trust successive gubbermints to continue paying out ten times the value of the power generated for the next 25 years? Really? I know the generators are the people paying it, but I'd be amazed if they're still forking out in 2035.

[Deva Link]

andy43 said:

And the second option of buying your own panels, based on the FITs payments?
Would you really trust successive gubbermints to continue paying out ten times the value of the power generated for the next 25 years? Really? I know the generators are the people paying it, but I'd be amazed if they're still forking out in 2035.

It's not ten times. The government has already been spanked once by the courts for trying to end the current rates early.

[jurbie]

Deva Link said:

andy43 said:

And the second option of buying your own panels, based on the FITs payments?
Would you really trust successive gubbermints to continue paying out ten times the value of the power generated for the next 25 years? Really? I know the generators are the people paying it, but I'd be amazed if they're still forking out in 2035.

It's not ten times. The government has already been spanked once by the courts for trying to end the current rates early.

It only went to court though because all the fly by night solar companies that have been set up on the back of all this were going out of business and they could still rely on some popular support. Australia is pushing ahead with all sorts of green ideas which are costing ordinary people a fortune resulting in popular support going out of the window and the Australian Labour Party being wiped out at recent elections. The upshot of this is that all the green measures, including solar, are about to be rolled back.

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/03/there-go-those-gr...

It'll happen here as well when people finally wake up to how much they are being shafted all in the name of saving the planet.