Free solar power system. Is it a scam?

Cardew

K4blades wrote: »

Exactly where are MY guesses, you really do portray yourself as someone determined to pick apart any arguement just for the sake of it.
You all just bully and intimidate anyone who suggests something positive about the schemes because of your agendas, and some of the arguments in this thread are pathetic. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but some of what is said is just out and out lies, but no-one better point that out, eh?
As was said above, any decent mods would have closed this thread down a long time ago instead of allowing miserable sods like you deter people from doing something that could save them some money. All you have done from page 1, is pull these schemes to bits, how sad and miserable you must be if you can't find anything constructive to say.

Your comments won't stop ASG, or the others, or the government, or those of us that are better informed, all you are doing is misleading those looking for impartial advice.

You would do well to reflect on your input to this thread and perhaps you will see all of the aggression, bullying and downright rudeness that is contained in your posts.

Perhaps others might also like to read them as well for an unbiased view.

You really don't seem to have any coherent argument other than to state the 'rent a roof' schemes are good and abuse anyone who has a different view.

If this forum was closely moderated, rather than the thread being closed, you would have had posting priveleges withdrawn.

zeupater

K4blades wrote: »

Exactly where are MY guesses, you really do portray yourself as someone determined to pick apart any arguement just for the sake of it.
You all just bully and intimidate anyone who suggests something positive about the schemes because of your agendas, and some of the arguments in this thread are pathetic. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but some of what is said is just out and out lies, but no-one better point that out, eh?
As was said above, any decent mods would have closed this thread down a long time ago instead of allowing miserable sods like you deter people from doing something that could save them some money. All you have done from page 1, is pull these schemes to bits, how sad and miserable you must be if you can't find anything constructive to say.

Your comments won't stop ASG, or the others, or the government, or those of us that are better informed, all you are doing is misleading those looking for impartial advice.

Hi All

Impartial advice ?

I think that many actually give impartial advice on this forum, without agenda ..... there are others who post with an agenda.

Many post to offer advice to others without the possibility of any financial reward whatsoever. Others have a vested interest behind their posts.

The main point discussed recently seems to be based around the percentage of production by an array which can be used in the home. It is definately in the interest of anyone with a link to the pv business sector to encourage the belief that the in house usage of generated power is higher as the cost of imported power would show a greater reduction, this is especially important to a 'rent-a-roof' scheme operator as the displacement of imported power is the only source of financial saving to the homeowner.

Myself, well I've posted reasons why, asked questions why not and seem to always be countered by pure obfuscation, as do many others who post on a logical basis .... but then again, I and others who post based on logic and experience don't seem to be linked to the industry .... unlike some with websites adverising their businesses with links stating .....

'We have recently joined forces with a local supplier of solar panels who can offer you FREE electricity. For details contact me or visit their site by clicking on the logo.', the logo being ASG's.

I am unsure whether the poster of the referenced post and the website quote above are related, perhaps clarification could be forthcoming (?), but it would explain why industry defensive posts continue to appear on this thread ....

If anyone bothers to read through this thread at any time, don't just read the words, sit back and consider what has been written and what has been provided to support what has been written, think, then draw your own conclusions .....

HTH
Z

grahamc2003

K4Blades, do you mind me asking whether or not you are in anyway involved in the solar panel business?

I think if you contribute here, any financial interests should be disclosed - perhaps a disclosure in your 'signature' as with various other company reps, if this applies to you.

I have no financial interest in this, or any other come to that, business.

K4blades

Once again, point proven thanks. All 3 of you, champing at the bit. You go snooping into my private business matters that I have not disclosed, but that's OK, feel free to plug my website and line of work, I think its against the rules for me to plug my own business on here, but if I have in some small way, a link to ASG, then so what, my opinion is no different to someone else's, just because they have panels on their roof that aren't ASGs.

In terms of issues, I've tried to avoid opinions because they don't count for much, so all I've done is refer readers to others sources of information. Take this current issue of 50% being used and 50% fed back. We have the "anti" for want of a better word saying that 50% is optimistic, other posters have said not. I simply referred the readers to other sources of information, (SAP calcs, utilities, EST), and yet it appears that the antis, the usual suspects, all come out against me, talking about me guessing....again I ask, what exactly have I guessed, suggesting that the government are wrong, it appears that everyone is wrong except them!

Then we had the issue of property values. Of course, the usual suspects all say the free schemes will devalue a house. I have no personal experience of this so don't know, and offer no opinion, (I think its too early to say, to be honest), but suggested that EST think otherwise, as do many estate agents, and most importantly as they have assets at stake, do the banks, yet again, this is ignored.
And when someone else posted details about someone who had sold their house after being on the ASG website, they came under intense scrutiny on here, without, as for as I know, consenting, suggesting they must have done other improvements, etc, etc. Anything to scrape an argument together...


Then there is the issue of loopholes being exploited...something that has been repeated many times, suggesting something not quite right about the way the rent a roofers are operating. Yet it was Sarah from ASG who explained, and provided details about the consultation they were involved with, prior to the scheme being launched. Again this was ignored, and the words loophole and exploited were constantly banded about.

Its very obvious from recent pages, that people are getting fed up of this, and I'm sure there is nothing you would like more, than for those of us who are in favour of the scheme to go away, but don't try and portray me as someone who "guesses", etc.

The usual suspects are a small band of three with an agenda against the scheme, at least Cardew has the honesty to admit it, who will turn everything into as much a negative a possible, using the flimsiest of arguments, and in the meantime suggest that everyone else, including the Government, banks, Energy Saving Trust, etc, etc, are all wrong and they are right. And as for my agenda, yes, I am in favour of the scheme. Why? 1)Because it create jobs, 2) It is allowing people from poorer backgounds to have a direct benefit from something that is usually reserved for the better off, PVs. Cardew's agenda is that he simply doesn't like the idea of someone else making money out of FITs, fair enough, though that totally ignores the fact that if it wasn't ASG, etc making money from our bills, it would be French owned EDF etc.... So readers, ignore my views, but ignore their views too, and get your advice from somewhere else, which is pretty much what I've been saying all along.

K4blades

grahamc2003 wrote: »

K4Blades, do you mind me asking whether or not you are in anyway involved in the solar panel business?

I think if you contribute here, any financial interests should be disclosed - perhaps a disclosure in your 'signature' as with various other company reps, if this applies to you.

I have no financial interest in this, or any other come to that, business.

I have my own business, and I am totally self employed. Some of my clients are solar panel installers.

That doesn't make PVs or FITs a bad idea, wasn't it you who said that if you had a broken leg, you would go to a doctor for advice. I repeat though, most of my posts are aimed at steering people to look in other places for advice, rather than from people on here.

On other forums, that are not business related, I advertise my business in my signature, but don't think it is allowed on here.

grahamc2003

When the Fits were announced, various forms of protection were incorporated into the scheme to get the industry back from the brink of developing into a commission driven double glazing style standard of service.

Looks like they failed.

So K4, all the abuse you dished out (and are still dishing out) was aimed at silencing those with an informed and neutral view in order for you to hopefully hide the considerable disadvantages of this scheme in order for you to secretly earn more money preying on others lack of knowledge.

Very moneysavingexpertish.

Cardew

Unbelievable! Really unbelievable!

The rudest most abusive poster on this thread is doing so because he has a vested interest in ASG and 'rent a roof' schemes and wants to stifle any debate.

Nice one zeupater - at least he is totally discredited!

Cardew

Just for the record and to repeat!
1. ASG seem to be about the best of the 'rent a roof' firms and there have been no substantial complaints on this forum.

2. Potential participants in the rent a roof schemes would do well to consider the risks and reward of any scheme. See earlier posts.

3. Of course the firms operating a rent a roof scheme have exploited a loophole. A firm installing thousands of individual systems, gets the subsidies(that we consumers pay) for individual properties. However a firm that installs the same capacity in a far more efficient and environmentally manner in one location, gets a much smaller subsidy. That of course is no criticism of the firms, or their customers, who exploit the loophole.

4. As so often on MSE you get people like K4blades - who has a direct vested interest in promoting 'rent a roof' schemes - who hide that self-interest - usually they are not rumbled!

5. This quote from Garham2003 must be just about the best on this forum:

When the Fits were announced, various forms of protection were incorporated into the scheme to get the industry back from the brink of developing into a commission driven double glazing style standard of service.

Looks like they failed.

M4ximillion

Cardew wrote: »

Just for the record and to repeat!
1. ASG seem to be about the best of the 'rent a roof' firms and there have been no substantial complaints on this forum.

2. Potential participants in the rent a roof schemes would do well to consider the risks and reward of any scheme. See earlier posts.

3. Of course the firms operating a rent a roof scheme have exploited a loophole. A firm installing thousands of individual systems, gets the subsidies(that we consumers pay) for individual properties. However a firm that installs the same capacity in a far more efficient and environmentally manner in one location, gets a much smaller subsidy. That of course is no criticism of the firms, or their customers, who exploit the loophole.

4. As so often on MSE you get people like K4blades - who has a direct vested interest in promoting 'rent a roof' schemes - who hide that self-interest - usually they are not rumbled!

I decided to stop posting some time ago because it felt like a battle everytime I said anything remotely positive about free PV - never mind what you say Cardew anyone pro free pv are totally bullied on this thread and you started it. At one point I even got slagged off cause I cant be bothered with punctuation - you lot got so desperate.

You even manage to pull XRay Dave to bits in your very clever, patronising way and iVE looked back and his posts are always really fair. I cant find the post where K4 declared an interest in ASG so i cant comment on that but to be honest whether he has an interest or not he made some fair comments as far as im concerned - as did lots of other folk you drove off this thread. I just thought I'd have a last look today before withdrawiing completely like Doc N and Jon T and as usual the pro free pv people are taking a bashing.

And by the way Cardew - I thought YOU worked for a power company so you definitely have an interest to be against free pv no matter what you say but i guess its ok with you cause you have your cronies to suck up to you together with the MSE folk - its quite obvious you and others have a definite hidden agenda otherwise you wouldnt have dug in with such ferocity. Its a load of crap that youre doing it for the greater good of poor unsuspecting folk like me who may be considering having free PV - ABSOLUTE RUBBISH! You have a hidden agenda its obvious. I dont believe for one tiny second that you have anyones interest at heart other than your own - NONE OF US HAVE! Youre not exactly whiter than white in that respect, think theres a bit of hypocrisy on your part Mr Holiday Home in the US.

K4 isnt the most abusive poster - YOU are Cardew! Except you do it in a much more clever way - but i guess if its done cleverly its acceptable isnt it?

For those of you who are thinking about having FREE solar pv - make your own mind up by talking to folk who already have it done and talking to the companies that are doing it and having a think about the pros and cons by talking to organisations like the Energy Saving Trust - organisations that dont have any vested interest but DONT make your mind up by reading forums like this - they are full of people with their own agendas.

Bye bye, cant stand this anymore - it stinks.

K4blades

They are so blinded by their bias, they cannot see how foolish they make themselves look.

So Reader, to re-cap.
The issue has been raised by others who want a sensible debate that it is reasonable to assume 50% of what is being generated is fed back to the grid.
Some have tried to say it is much more than that, based on almost no evidence, other than that of a couple of uses, and one of those, IIRC, has electric heating, so not exactly typical.
So for an un-biased view I suggested looking elsewhere for evidence.
I mentioned the government, (DECC or CLG, both departments have armies of civil servants,

advisors, scientists and experts, etc).

Or you could try EST. The Energy Saving Trust is a quango that is aimed at giving independent and

impartial advice about saving energy and employs countless numbers of experts to do this.

You could try BRE. The Building Research Establishment has many years of experience, with millions of pounds behind it, studying amongst other things, energy use in the home.
You could try NHER. The National Home Energy Rating is another organisation with many years of experience, and millions of pounds spent on experts and scientists who study these things.
Or you could ask the simple question, "if its a lot more than 50%, why do the utility companies, WHO ARE PAYING FOR IT, pay for 50%?
Or you could go on the internet and find other numerous sources that are all happy with the 50% figure.

Having mentioned this, Graham accuses me of guessing and suggests that the Government are wrong. I ask exactly what I have guessed but that question is ignored, and so we should accept that all these organisations are wrong, and they are right.
Maybe the reason they don't have time to answer my direct question is that they are all so busy looking for ways to discredit me, by snooping for everything they can find and when they find out my business, in some small way, benefits from FITs, they rejoice, see Cardews comments, so immature, but better than actually dealing with the issue??
I have said all along that one of the consequences of FITs is that it creates jobs and brings money to smaller local businesses at the expense of the major utilities, often foreign owned. Most people see that as a good thing.
So then they try to scare you, dear Reader, into thinking that FITs are costing you a fortune on your bills, but none of them will come out and admit that bills would not be any less without FITs, and in any case amounts to pennies across an individual bill. Another issue they tried to gloss over or discredit.

Then there is the issue of house values. The scare you into thinking your house is going to be hard to sell, and fall in value. I said I don't know, but the banks disagree with their view, and they have billions of pounds tied up on houses that are having PVs fitted. You could also ask an estate agent and see what they think. Of course, yet another issue that they don't address, as their opinion is all that matters and everyone else is wrong.

They accuse me of trying to stifle debate, but recently 2 people have said they no longer wish to take part, because for a long time they have tried to offer constructive and useful advice, only to find it constantly being pulled apart by people who THINK they know better. Jon and Doc were not the first either, if you go through this thread others too, have come on to speak in favour of FITs, etc, only to find themselves come under scrutiny, and getting accused of being "duped" etc.
Everyone else is wrong...these three are always right? And they will go to great lengths to win the arguments, not by dealing with the issues, but for looking for ways to discredit someone who has an opposing view.

So I repeat for you reader, these people think I have an agenda, where as I think they have an agenda, so the best thing to do would be to ignore this thread completely and get your advice somewhere else.

But Graham mentioned being "very moneysavingexpertish" so lets try and keep it simple so that even he can understand it:
If you can't afford to buy the panels yourself, you could have them fitted free and save some money off your electricty bill,
or you could decide Not to have them fitted and carry on paying what you are now.

Thats what it all boils down to if you strip away all the scare-mongering, opinions and false-hoods. No doubt they will carry on looking for ways to discredit me, so instead, go look elsewhere for your advice. There is a lot of it out there, and most of it from people with genuine good intention.