Purchasing prooerty with solar panels. How do I know if owned or leased?

beckym1987

I think we're reconsidering purchasing the property at this point as we were purchasing the house based on a lie. I questioned the solar panels at the beginning as we wouldn't have continued if we were aware they were leased. We've purchased the house on false information so don't think we will be continuing at this point

lisyloo

Is this because you no longer trust the seller?


I'm not sure what the issue is with leased solar panels.
Surely you get the benefit i.e. lower electricity, but not the upkeep so they aren't bad per se.

lisyloo

Cakeguts wrote: »

The electricity bill is lower than it would have been but it is just an electricity bill it doesn't include what you have produced. You don't get a reduction on the bill. I don't know what happens if the panels are leased.

If the panels are leased the householder gets the benefit of the electricity produced i.e. pays for less electricity, but there are no FIT payments. The company that put the panels up get the FIT payments.


When the seller says there is a reduction on the bill I think she means there bill is lower on account of the electricity they haven't had to buy due to the solar generation - not an explicit discount.

davidmcn

beckym1987 wrote: »

I think we're reconsidering purchasing the property at this point as we were purchasing the house based on a lie.

Was it a lie or were they just mistaken? Many sellers give the wrong answers because they don't understand the questions, not because they're trying to mislead anyone.

lisyloo

because they don't understand the questions

In general it's true but "do you own it" is pretty clear for there to be a misunderstanding.
I'm selling a property where there are things I don't know (and the owner is a nursing home and can't answer) - but I understand that I shouldn't say definitively yes or no if I don't know because I'm liable for the answer.


They asked if there was japanses knotweed. I suspect there isn't as there is a managing agent and full time manager but I know that I don't know !

beckym1987

The way I look at it is when we asked of they were owned 10 weeks ago, had we been told that they were leased, I wouldn't have given it a second thought and would have continued looking. Yes we are going to be out of pocket and yes we are invested in the property as we were literally a few days away from signing. Should we continue with a house purchase that we wouldn't have gone through with if we knew the truth from the beginning? Should we be asking for a discount if they wish to proceed? Or should we stick to the decision we would have made 10 weeks ago if we had been told the truth?

One part of my hopes that the seller didn't know and perhaps she was being naive as surely if she did know the truth then she is taking a huge risk too. She's going to lose out on the Estate Agents fees, solicitors fees, the house she picked and she's also got rid of a lot of furniture already as it wouldn't fit in her new house / they were leaving her some furniture which she preferred. Then on the other hand I think that surely she knew as when she bought the house, this would have been in all the paperwork etc. Also she managed to get a copy of the lease agreement in less than 24 hours.

The house just gives me a sick feeling instead of an excited feeling when I think about it. It's just really put me off and it's not the first thing she has lied about either

lisyloo

I would stick to your guns and understand completely that you've lost trust with the seller.



You are perfectly entitled to have what you want but I'm still curious what you feel is the downside is of having leased panels.

AnotherJoe

lisyloo wrote: »

Is this because you no longer trust the seller?
I'm not sure what the issue is with leased solar panels.
Surely you get the benefit i.e. lower electricity, but not the upkeep so they aren't bad per se.

The issue is that some leases have conditions that some (many) mortgage lenders do not like and will not lend on houses with that type of lease.
Those leases can be changed (for a fee) but there also a nasty scenario whereby the company that owned the lease went bust and theres no clear successor and no way to change the lease to one the mortgage co will accept.
OP may find the lease company want a big wadge of money to change the lease, or they may decline that but offer to sell the panels to the owner, which could easily be five figures.

lisyloo

Thanks that makes sense.

beckym1987

The issue is that although we may find that this mortgage company are fine to go ahead if the lease protects their back if the house is repossessed, this doesn't mean that we won't find issues in the future. When we decide to shop about for a better mortgage in 5 years when our fixed rate runs out, we might find that we struggle to get another mortgage company to take over. The second issue is that we bought that house because there was room to extend, which we may be unable to do due to the leased solar panels. The house is over 40 years old so at some point it may need a roof repair and we would also have to pay for the solar panels removing and refitting. The last reason is that this reduces the valuation of the house, so the price we were purchasing it for is not the price that the house is worth. It may also affect future sales and future buyers being able to get a mortgage.

We would never benefit from solar panels as we are at work all day so unless they're owned then all they are to us is an eyesore that could possibly cause us issues in the future. They may not but that isn't a risk I'm willing to take. Also we aren't getting what was advertised.