Free solar power system. Is it a scam?

SarahLucyD

XRAYDAVE - no you're mistaken, the panels cannot be removed on a whim of the homeowner - it would be entirely inequitable as we can't remove them on a whim either and an agreement has to act both ways. There is a clause that stipulates that we will remove them in their entirety at least twice free of charge and then replace them free of charge should the homeowner wish to carry out renovations etc.

Arthurian claiming it is a 'lost' sale if someone who doesn't want panels doesn't enquire on a house that has them installed is a non-starter in my view and makes no sense. Where do you stop? I don't have a garage to my property so that would stop someone from putting in a bid for my property if they wanted a garage. So if you apply Arthurian's argument - I've lost out on a sale because I don't have a garage! Taken further, that would also mean that I'd lost out on a sale if a buyer wanted a 5 bedroom house because mine isn't 5 bed - and I could go on. Apologies, but I don't buy that. They simply wouldn't even look at my house as a possibility, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't sell my property, my property would be sold to someone who is looking for my type of property, that's all.

What I believe, after having experienced people's enormous enthusiasm for our systems, is that they would actually assist a sale and shift the house much faster as there are many more people who want them in these parts than who don't. The main attraction being that not only do they provide free electricity but they are also NOT their responsibility, ever, they will never be lumbered with the cost of maintaining them. We have a couple of homeowners who are estate agents who had them insalled because they were convinced that they would help them to sell the property faster when the time came.

We have had homeowners from entire rows of houses apply for them because they didn't want to be the only house without them as they were worried that their property wouldn't be worth as much as their neighbour's if they didn't have them.

As time goes on they will become more and more the norm - just as satellite dishes are - there was a time only five or six years ago when I used to laugh at people re-cycling. Now it's second nature to me. Now you're a pariah if you don't.

Sarah - ASG

Doc_N

Just out of curiosity, Sarah, if government lawyers reach the conclusion that the ASG scheme isn't within the letter or spirit of the law, and that the FIT payments aren't payable, where does that leave ASG's customers? Who takes the hit - ASG, or the customer? What does the ASG/customer agreement say about this?

SarahLucyD

DocN - we wouldn't have even set about this had we not received confirmation that what we are doing is entirely legal. We consulted with Whitehall in the first instance and told them about our business model and they confirmed that it was within the spirit of the FIT Scheme as we are making solar available to thousands of homeowners, many of whom wouldn't ordinarily be able to afford it. They were also hoping it would encourage lenders to provide loans for the equipment, which could then be repaid via the FIT payments. We are doing exactly that in a way, our scheme is a bit like providing the panels on a long term loan - except the homeowner is never liable for anything, but they do get to keep the system in the end. Further, as part of due diligence by our investors, Lawyers independent of us checked with the government that what we are doing is legal.

Sarah - ASG

Cardew

SarahLucyD wrote: »

DocN - we wouldn't have even set about this had we not received confirmation that what we are doing is entirely legal. We consulted with Whitehall in the first instance and told them about our business model and they confirmed that it was within the spirit of the FIT Scheme as we are making solar available to thousands of homeowners, many of whom wouldn't ordinarily be able to afford it. They were also hoping it would encourage lenders to provide loans for the equipment, which could then be repaid via the FIT payments. We are doing exactly that in a way, our scheme is a bit like providing the panels on a long term loan - except the homeowner is never liable for anything, but they do get to keep the system in the end. Further, as part of due diligence by our investors, Lawyers independent of us checked with the government that what we are doing is legal.

Sarah - ASG

'Spirit of the law'? Did the Government put that in writing?

I posted this in the other thread:

IMO companies like ASG have exploited a loophole in the regulations - not that I am criticising them.

FIT payments reduce as the size of the system increases; for systems < 4kWp it is 41.3p/kWh and reduces as the system size increases.

The Government in announcing the introduction of FITs stated:

"The Government has today announced the eagerly anticipated ‘Feed-in Tariff’ rates for small scale low carbon energy installations... "

Note 'small scale'

Nobody could call the ASG operation, with hundreds/thousands of systems, small scale. Yet they get an untaxed, inflation linked income that was intended to go to private householders.

It would be far more efficient - and cost us consumers a lot less money in subsidies( which are profit to ASG) if thousands of panels were erected in a field or on the roof of the huge factories/warehouses. Economy of scale, mimimal installation/maintenance costs etc. However large scale systems don't get the large FITs.

I am amazed that the Government allowed a commercial large scale system to masquerade as lots of small scale systems. However as we the energy customers pay the subsidy in increased charges - and not the government - they don't care.

Whilst the legality is not in dispute, I cannot see that FITs - which are paid for by us customers by means of a levy - were ever intended (in the spirit of the proposals!) to make a profit for a commercial firm.

If a firm like British Gas started installing tens of thousands of systems on their customer's houses and pocketing the high rate FITs there would be uproar IMO.

SarahLucyD

Cardew - we are at risk of going over very old ground here. I didn't say 'spirit of the law' I said they'd enivsaged this happening and that it was within the spirit of the FIT Scheme that solar power would be made widely available to the general public because of companies like ours. They said this face to face in a meeting we had with them, Andrej Miller from DECC was one of them (and we have contemperaneous notes). Do you think we would have started all this before ensuring that it was entirely acceptable? As I said to you many months ago - I doubt you'd be so critical if we were selling 6000 systems (which would be much, much more profitable in the short term). Then all those 6000 homeowners would be able to claim the FIT. What's the difference really? Yes, we make a profit, but we would however we did it, and as I said in my post above - our scheme is really no different to a homeowner taking out a long term loan to buy a system (and use their FIT to pay for it) except with our scheme they're never actually liable for anything and don't ever have to pay a penny but at the end of the term they own the system (if they want it).


Sarah - ASG

noncom_2

I agree with SarahLucyD.

The point of the FIT scheme, is not to make money for wealthy homeowners (that is a charge which has been made against it, but I think the debates which have taken place on here give the lie to that theory - it is a reasonable investment over the long term, but by no means a giveaway).

The point is to increase hugely the amount of clean energy generated in this country and assist with carbon reduction targets.

Could you get more bang per buck by instead funding massive solar or wind farms? Absolutely yes. So why did the Government not create an incentive scheme for these instead? Because time and time again, well placed and planned proposals are derailed by short-sighted NIMBYs.

Introducing the FIT scheme circumvents this easily. No planning permission is required in the vast majority of cases for small scale installations. Householders adding panels to their own property will benefit from FITs (if they do it themselves) and free electricity if they get someone else to do it (such as ASG).

Cardew

noncom wrote: »

I agree with SarahLucyD.

The point of the FIT scheme, is not to make money for wealthy homeowners (that is a charge which has been made against it, but I think the debates which have taken place on here give the lie to that theory - it is a reasonable investment over the long term, but by no means a giveaway).

The point is to increase hugely the amount of clean energy generated in this country and assist with carbon reduction targets.

Could you get more bang per buck by instead funding massive solar or wind farms? Absolutely yes. So why did the Government not create an incentive scheme for these instead? Because time and time again, well placed and planned proposals are derailed by short-sighted NIMBYs.

Introducing the FIT scheme circumvents this easily. No planning permission is required in the vast majority of cases for small scale installations. Householders adding panels to their own property will benefit from FITs (if they do it themselves) and free electricity if they get someone else to do it (such as ASG).

There is of course no right or wrong in this matter, it is just opinion.

The wind farms are often refused planning permission because of NIMBYs - who often have very real grounds for their objections, noise for one!
However there are scores of thousands of huge warehouses and factories with a flat roof able to support masses of perfectly orientated panels and give a huge output. As they are invariably on industrial estates there couldn't possibly be any objections. As you say that would give us more 'bang per buck' and don't forget we are paying those bucks in higher prices.

Do you not believe if an unpopular firm like BG tried to introduce such a scheme there would be an outcry. 'Using a loophole to deprive customers of their high rate FITs' etc etc.

SarahLucyD

Cardew - as regards a large power company doing it - it is my belief that they will and some may already have plans in place - but even the large power companies will have to find the funding first - and you do need a huge amount of funding to get this type of scheme off the ground. Even the huge power companies wouldn't have the 'spare' capital (that isn't earmarked for something else) to do it. And if they did, who would actually start the outcry? I know that you wouldn't be happy but there is a dearth of knowledge out there about the FIT Scheme (although what we're doing has spread the word).

We were told, and I believe, that the government is hoping that 750,000 homes will have solar panels by the end of the incentive (although I stand to be corrected). Accordingly it is my view that this is their goal and once it is reached they may actually stop the FIT Scheme to any new installs after that. But I don't think they're really bothered about how we get to that 750,000 - whether it is by way of a huge power company doing it all or smaller companies such as ours doing a few thousand.

Sarah D - ASG

dyrniboy

Hi, I am reading this interesting thread with a view to install a PV sysytem on my south facing roof. I would like to install a system from acompany such as ASG. I have contacted them by e-mail only to be told that because I live in N. Wales they could not do anything for me because they are concentrating on the Yorkshire and surrounding area. So my question is, Does any body else kmow of any other companies offering a similar scheme ?. If a ASG representitive is reading this, would you reconsider doing one in N.Wales?. There would be plenty more !!

XRayDave

SarahLucyD wrote: »

XRAYDAVE - no you're mistaken, the panels cannot be removed on a whim of the homeowner - it would be entirely inequitable as we can't remove them on a whim either and an agreement has to act both ways. There is a clause that stipulates that we will remove them in their entirety at least twice free of charge and then replace them free of charge should the homeowner wish to carry out renovations etc.

Hi Sarah,

My understanding was that if at any stage I decided (I haven't let me stress) to have the panels removed, I could request this and they would be removed - at no cost to me and no questions asked.

I also understood that I could have the panels removed temporarily (for replacement of the roof tiles for example) and have them reinstalled later - again at no cost to me.

Finally, I was led to believe that should I sell the house and a new owner wanted the panels removing (why I don't know), then again this would be done at no cost to them (or me).

This is correct isn't it?

XRD