Current PV panel prices

Mx123456

Just had a salesman from Biggreen Energy Company quote me for an 18 panel 3.96Kwh system fully fitted for £20,500.

Need to do some more shopping around now.

thenudeone

Mx123456 wrote: »

Just had a salesman from Biggreen Energy Company quote me for an 18 panel 3.96Kwh system fully fitted for £20,500.

£20.5k is way over the top for that spec. (unless there are some huge access or location issues)
I have had around a dozen quotes for a 4kW system and the most expensive was £5k less than that!

thenudeone

Planet Solar have just sent a flier offering a 3.7kW system based on Sharp ND60 225W panels for £9995 during May only "due to an overflow of panels from one of our commercial projects".
The reason may be spurious but the price is a cracker (as long as it is an inclusive installed price)

http://www.mediafire.com/?yg1vvbjyx2p5wvz

Pity I'm already out of the cooling off period for my proposed installation!

stoozey

thenudeone wrote: »

Planet Solar have just sent a flier offering a 3.7kW system based on Sharp ND60 225W panels for £9995 during May only "due to an overflow of panels from one of our commercial projects".
The reason may be spurious but the price is a cracker (as long as it is an inclusive installed price)

http://www.mediafire.com/?yg1vvbjyx2p5wvz

Pity I'm already out of the cooling off period for my proposed installation!

IT doesn't say that the price includes installation or an inverter etc.

thenudeone

That's true, but the quoted ROI for the 3.7kWh is 16.9% "based on SAP calculations".
£1693 / £9995 = 16.9% return
I'm 99% sure that the costs in the SAP calculation have to include installation costs and all ancillaries such as an inverter and wiring.

This would be a blatant breach of the regulations if £9995 wasn't an installed price.

zeupater

thenudeone wrote: »

That's true, but the quoted ROI for the 3.7kWh is 16.9% "based on SAP calculations".
£1693 / £9995 = 16.9% return
I'm 99% sure that the costs in the SAP calculation have to include installation costs and all ancillaries such as an inverter and wiring.

This would be a blatant breach of the regulations if £9995 wasn't an installed price.

Hi

And exactly how did they work out the SAP calculations when they don't know .....

Roof Angle
Orientation
Location
Shading .....


..... also, what if there is an issue on the scaffolding, access, location, distance .... then again, what's the MCS status of the 225W panels from the commercial contract, no certificate, no FiT ..... http://www.microgenerationcertification.org/mcs-consumer/product-search.php

Is the company mentioned this one ? ...... http://www.microgenerationcertification.org/mcs-consumer/installer-profile.php?ID=80449 ...... if not, check the database to ensure that they're certified ..... no certificate, no FiT.

I would do a lot more research if I were looking at offers such as this .....

HTH
Z

thenudeone

The flier clearly states "MCS certified".
To correct my earlier post, it also states ”Remember, our quotation is for all aspects of system design, supply of quality components, installation and commissioning."

You have identified the correct company on the MCS database.

It's worthwhile doing research; but on the other hand, if a company advertises an MCS certified product and installation eligible for FiT which turns out not to be; I would just take the credit card company to court to reclaim the full cost under s75. Simples!

To be fair, the flier was not received in isolation but as a follow up to an earlier price list which included the caveats:

It is assumed that the roof planned for the development has minimal shading and a pitch of approximately 30º, and is South facing. “The performance of solar PV systems is impossible to predict with certainty due to the variability in the amount of solar radiation (sunlight) from location to location and from year to year.
This estimate is based upon the Government’s standard assessment procedure for energy rating of buildings (SAP) and is given as guidance only. It should not be considered as a guarantee of performance.” .... NB: All prices are subject to survey.

zeupater

thenudeone wrote: »

The flier clearly states "MCS certified".
To correct my earlier post, it also states ”Remember, our quotation is for all aspects of system design, supply of quality components, installation and commissioning."

You have identified the correct company on the MCS database.

It's worthwhile doing research; but on the other hand, if a company advertises an MCS certified product and installation eligible for FiT which turns out not to be; I would just take the credit card company to court to reclaim the full cost under s75. Simples!

To be fair, the flier was not received in isolation but as a follow up to an earlier price list which included the caveats:

It is assumed that the roof planned for the development has minimal shading and a pitch of approximately 30º, and is South facing. “The performance of solar PV systems is impossible to predict with certainty due to the variability in the amount of solar radiation (sunlight) from location to location and from year to year.
This estimate is based upon the Government’s standard assessment procedure for energy rating of buildings (SAP) and is given as guidance only. It should not be considered as a guarantee of performance.” .... NB: All prices are subject to survey.

Hi

The main point here is in the quoted text : "NB: All prices are subject to survey.".

I had a quote from a national installer who advertised (and still does) a fully installed fixed price, 'subject to survey', where the 'unstandard' scaffolding was going to be around £1000 extra, the dedicated extention consumer unit £500, new earth bonding £350 (despite already being to latest spec !), the Sunnybeam & bluetooth card £500, roof structure strengthening £400 (whatever this was for !!), under specified inverter and on.. and on ..... :rotfl: ...... almost £2.5k in unnecessary 'extras' & £500 for a monitor ..... :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

HTH
Z

thenudeone

No doubt he was sent away very quickly having wasted his time and travel costs.

Such practices are thankfully uncommon, because most companies realise that they would be very unlikely to lead to a sale, but instead create a disgruntled ex-potential customer.

zeupater

thenudeone wrote: »

No doubt he was sent away very quickly having wasted his time and travel costs.

Such practices are thankfully uncommon, because most companies realise that they would be very unlikely to lead to a sale, but instead create a disgruntled ex-potential customer.

Hi

Actually, when the surveyor left it seemed that the scaffolding in particular would be 'standard' and the additional costs on the quote came as quite a surprise ...... they are one of the larger national concerns in pv installation but still made a complete botch of their quotation process ... their first attempt was obviously a pre-filled template which bore no relation to either my property or what I requested, the only information which was correct was the address ...... I received about five or six variants of the quotation before all of the errors were ironed out & in the meantime found more professional companies to quote ...... The error which finally destroyed their credibility came with the quotation follow-up telephone calls, one for each quotation posted and two of the calls were received within the same hour :mad:

Following a number of threads on this forum & elsewhere you'll find that the practice is more common than you may first think, with a number of 'additional' costs being added to 'headline' advertised prices. The more that people are aware of the practice and typical prices, the less likely the installers will try it on.

HTH
Z