Free solar panel discussion

beedydad

iscamaid wrote: »

I applied to Bristish Gas and Homesun. Bristish Gas were very quick in contacting me but as I was not a customer they could not fit the free system. They called me on 3 seperate occasions asking the same thing, which became a bit annoying. Homesun have sent a rep out to have a preliminary look at the roof. Seemed fairly professional and prompt. They measured the roof as being 8m x 5m which I would make as being 40sq m. However they were unable to commit to this being adequate and said it may not meet their 30sq m area needed for free installation. They have now dropped the £500 payment for the solar share option (possibly had very little take up?) and are now operating a £5 per month payment if your roff is less than the 30sq m. I am getting a technical surveyor out to make a more accurate chack in a week and will post then how it goes. Not sure if I would take up the £5 per monthif I am less than the required amount (how they could make this with an excess of 40sq m south facing roof I do not know..............). Holding back judgement for the time being would love it if anyone has had a system installed by Homesun could psot and say how it went.

It seems that under this "share" scheme you are still only going to recieve a discount on the electricity you actually use.

It does NOT seem to give you the full FIT (ie the 41.3p generated) + 3p export as these will be kept by Homesun.

It is a smaller solar kit as well.

If I am wrong in my assumption i apologise. If not then this is a terrible appalling scheme.

Reason being is that you are paying a third party for the privilage of renting your own roof from yourself - bizzar and very very charitable! Ask them how many have taken up this option?

Mcfi5dhc

beedydad wrote: »

If I am wrong in my assumption i apologise. If not then this is a terrible appalling scheme.

You are not wrong, you are right

Homeowner saves about £50/60 in electric per year, but pays £60 for the priviledge.

Company gets £1,000 a year (roughly) from the FIT

furndire

Very very unfair, you don't gain a huge amount from the saving on your electricity, and effectively the greedy barstewards are even clawing that back. At least ASG are taking responsibility for the system when they install one.
Beedydad - None of the "free" operators give you the FiT payments as far as I am aware

grahamc2003

furndire wrote: »

Very very unfair, you don't gain a huge amount from the saving on your electricity, and effectively the greedy barstewards are even clawing that back. At least ASG are taking responsibility for the system when they install one.
Beedydad - None of the "free" operators give you the FiT payments as far as I am aware

'Unfair' is a strange word in business. They are offering a service, and if people want to voluntarily agree to their terms, then that's up to them. If they want a negative rent for their roof, then you can't really blame businessmen maximising their profits by getting paid twice to put their PV panels on their roofs.

I think the whole idea of fits is unfair - I have to pay for it, yet have absolutely no say at all. Were I paying for something cost-effective or efficient, I wouldn't mind so much, but paying so much for so little generating capacity which is not available at all when needed most, is just nonsense.

beedydad

grahamc2003 wrote: »

'Unfair' is a strange word in business. They are offering a service, and if people want to voluntarily agree to their terms, then that's up to them. If they want a negative rent for their roof, then you can't really blame businessmen maximising their profits by getting paid twice to put their PV panels on their roofs.

I think the whole idea of fits is unfair - I have to pay for it, yet have absolutely no say at all. Were I paying for something cost-effective or efficient, I wouldn't mind so much, but paying so much for so little generating capacity which is not available at all when needed most, is just nonsense.

I guess thats why bloggers/posters of MSE get the benefit of seeing the errors of their ways!

FIT's may well be unfair around the edges - but it is well tried and tested in various/similar forms around Europe and has been the main trigger to get the renewable energy industry off the ground and pushed forward technology and cost reductions bringing it more economically viable as a stand alone option(or rather one of the options) - propably in the nearish future.

It will not progress as many of these things do unless there is some form of incentive.

Regards

Cardew

grahamc2003 wrote: »

'Unfair' is a strange word in business. They are offering a service, and if people want to voluntarily agree to their terms, then that's up to them. If they want a negative rent for their roof, then you can't really blame businessmen maximising their profits by getting paid twice to put their PV panels on their roofs.

Mmmm - have you read the transcript of Martin's evidence to the Parliamentary Committee - see his blog. Although on finance he makes some very good points, that are relevant to this discussion, where he talks about people who are financially illiterate and in particular 'fairness'.

He made this statement:

-I’ve always had a problem with treating customers fairly, in that I can set up the most abysmally over-expensive product with stealth charges and, as long as I tell you about it, even if you don’t understand it, and I get you to sign on the line, and I follow the procedures, I am treating you fairly, according to the rules. For me, regulation needs to look at the real impact of the product, and product rate, and product charges

Anyone who agrees to actually pay a 'negative rent'(as you put it) is either technically or financially illiterate - or both.

The problem is that these systems are marketed such that people really believe that they are going to save hundreds of pounds a year off their bill.

Someone posted on here recently about a 2.8kWp system that required paying £500 and £5 a month.

I am noticing savings of around £15-£20 per month on my electricity as well as sending 20 ish units per day back to the national grid. On my workings i calculate that to be 60p a day working out at around £180 per year plus a deduction of £180 - £240 per year of my electricity bill. All in all a sound £500 investment as my money will easily be re-couped within 24 months

So his system produces close to 8,000kWh a year!!

Some people could be duped into voluntarily agreeing to sell their new-born child's kidneys - but it wouldn't be fair!

grahamc2003

I take your point Cardew (although I haven't read Martin's points).

The problem as I see it is you can't really do much in a freeish country about ignorance (or stupidity). Some people buy timeshares off plan in places a thousand miles away (is that stupidity, or the acheivement of an ambition to own a foriegn property?).

I expect those who pay £5pm for someone to put their pv panels on their roof either think they'll make a profit out of it, or they think they are saving the planet or something. Whatever they think, I don't think they should be stopped from entering into a contract if they want to (assuming everything is legal of course). It's sad, but the people posting here have obviously read what you and I and others say, so they are hardly entering into a contract in complete ignorance. They just prefer to believe what salemen tell them! Afterall, there is no compulsion to do anything.

Apart from paying for the fits of course. There's compulsion there, and that is the real travesty - being forced to pay for something which is born of ignorance by MPs. (And of course it is purely the fits which lead to the rent-a-roof scheme bad but legal practices
anyhow).

Equaliser123

JenR8 wrote: »

Ohhh yes!! We were intersted in their free offer. The 'salesman' visited, left with £100 so-called 'returnable deposit', and after survey we were turned down for 'free panels', offered the £500 + £5 per month system, and had the devil's own job getting our £100 back! (But we did).

Why on earth would you pay a deposit for a free system?

JenR8

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Why on earth would you pay a deposit for a free system?

Exactly what we asked! But the rep assured us it was to 'secure a survey' and would be returned to us later. My other half assumed it was to show serious intent on our part. I wasn't happy about it, as the rep had only been in the job for a couple of weeks and didn't seem too sure of things.

M4ximillion

grahamc2003 wrote: »

I expect those who pay £5pm for someone to put their pv panels on their roof either think they'll make a profit out of it, or they think they are saving the planet or something. Whatever they think, I don't think they should be stopped from entering into a contract if they want to (assuming everything is legal of course). It's sad, but the people posting here have obviously read what you and I and others say, so they are hardly entering into a contract in complete ignorance. They just prefer to believe what salemen tell them! Afterall, there is no compulsion to do anything.

Sorry for sounding thick (as usual) but is there anyone on this thread whos actually entered into this contract with homesun? Or am I missing something? I know youre discussing it now but has anyone signed on the dotted line??? I asked further down if someone had had a system ffrom one of the other companies but cant remember seeiing anything.l Thats why I didnt even bother applying through their websites, because they never sent me a copy of their contracts first, unlike ASG. I know what you think about these companies and what you think about us poor ignorant folk whove signed up for some free leccy, but at least with ASG i'm not paying THEM anything. Not a penny. At least with them free does mean free. Does Isis charge does anybody know?