buying house with solar panels on 25yr lease????

jjuggle

my mum wants to buy this house but her solictior has discovered it has a 25yr lease on the attic for solar panels, and thinks it will be extremely hard to sell in future as lenders don't like lending on properties with this arrangement. She's not sure whether to go ahead or not. Any advice would be lovely. Thanks

paul1964_2

Hi. Not sure what lenders' policies are, but as a buyer, I would not even look at a property where the roof is leased to a solar panel company - just don't fancy the added complication.

My views on this may well be illogical, but I am willing to bet that there are plenty of other people with similar feelings. So your mum may well find it more difficult to resell than a "normal" house.

ValHaller

jjuggle wrote: »

my mum wants to buy this house but her solictior has discovered it has a 25yr lease on the attic for solar panels, and thinks it will be extremely hard to sell in future as lenders don't like lending on properties with this arrangement. She's not sure whether to go ahead or not. Any advice would be lovely. Thanks

If she is a cash buyer, she absolutely must take into account the opinions of the mortgage lenders. Otherwise she will be done up like a kipper and have an unsaleable house

jjuggle

my thoughts exactly! one of my friends has suggested we get the seller to terminate the lease on completion - could this be an option?

steppevos

jjuggle wrote: »

my thoughts exactly! one of my friends has suggested we get the seller to terminate the lease on completion - could this be an option?

It will cost the seller hugely (depending on the size it could be more than £10,000 - Feed-in-tarifs pay the installer well). The owner of the house will profit from some free electricity (but likely less than £100 per year).
On the other hand if your mother is planning to stay there for a long time or if this type of house is mostly bought by cash buyers, then it maybe less of a problem, but even then it would be worth to negotiate a discount because of the rent-a-roof solar panels.
It maybe worth to read up on these issues on the Green & Ethical section of this forum, or even repost there. You are more likely to get reactions there.

Itismehonest

I can't put a proper link to the subject on the Law Society site because it says it's down for maintenance but lenders probably wouldn't touch the place or could insist on their removal before considering giving any mortgage.
While this may not matter in your mother's case there could always be other problems which arise during the 25 year period which may not necessarily be easy to resolve.
The issue of lending could, however, arise when the property next came up for sale making it difficult to shift without another cash buyer willing to take chances with a, by then, even older installation.
I'd advise your mother to look for somewhere else.

JoeA81

Agreed, read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/mar/23/solar-panels-dim-mortgage-prospects?INTCMP=SRCH

Mallotum_X

Personally I would avoid, too many potential pit falls, unless the panels are gone.

Repairs to the roof will cost significantly more with the panels needing to be removed prior to a repair taking place.

If the company owning them goes bust you are stuck with this kit on the roof that if breaks will be down to your mother to maintain.

It will put off future purchasers.

I would consider putting in an offer with the proviso that the lease and equipment is removed prior to completion.

Furts

To explain my position. Ever since these schemes surfaced I have advised those who asked to avoid them like the plague. This has included my own family members.

There are some technical issues that may be relevant. The companies installing the panels are after the quick buck. The panel quality, inverter quality and installation can all be inferior to a private installation. This could mean future breakdowns, call outs and disruption.

The installers tend not to care about the roof, nor any damage they cause. They are not answerable to the home owner - their contract, and contact, is with the company offering the "free" panels.

Then there are Building Regulations, wind loadings, roof design, fixings, tile compatibility etc. The "free" panel companies are not particularly bothered about any of these.

Finally, I have yet to come across any of these installations where the home owner has undertaken even a fundamental check on the quality of the installation and workmanship. Not to mention obtained structural calculations, or roof design, or Building Regulations...

This was an area of rogue traders. The FIT Tariffs were reduced by the government because these traders were exploiting a system that was never intended for them. Many people were taken in and may regret this in the years to come. However, in the interests of a balanced argument many people will be happy with their installations - but for some of these it may be a case of ignorance is bliss!

It is little wonder lenders and mortgage companies are wary of homes with these installations.

daveyjp

Furts wrote: »

Then there are Building Regulations, wind loadings, roof design, fixings, tile compatibility etc. The "free" panel companies are not particularly bothered about any of these.
.

There's no requirement for building regs approval to fit solar panels. For the reasons stated above this is not such a good thing.

theartfullodger

Ask for a lot off the price: I'd start at a reduction of at least the likely costs of removal & compo to whoever owns the lease + £20k...