Solar Thermal Panels Leasehold Flat Decision

jamesh2702

Hi All,

I am in the enquiry stage (5 months in) of the purchase of a leasehold flat. For the last two months my solicitor has been trying to get some answers to questions about solar thermal panels on the roof.

My solicitor wanted a certificate to show they complied with building regulations, an mcs certificate, whether they were bought on finance or owned outright and whether they were part of the FIT scheme.

In short the seller's solicitor could not provide the above. What they could provide was a statement from the management company/freeholder stating that they were unable to locate the certificate from installation but that they were responsible for maintaining the panels, the installation (inside the flat) was the responsibility of the flat owner, there is not FIT applicable and that they do not effect the service charge.

The response was put to the lender which just pointed to the guidelines around leased solar panels which wasn't applicable here (my solicitor went back to them three times but they basically said it was up to him).

My solicitor has said to me I have two options - I ask for a deed of variation where the lease would be amended to include who is responsible, who owns them etc etc or I take it on the chin and go ahead with the purchase with the information we have. He mentioned he looked into indemnity insurance but they wouldn't insure without an mcs certificate.

I also have a letter from the management agent which asks the current owner for permission to do maintenance on the solar thermal panel which was paid for by the management agent and not the current owner a few years back. They also sent over a welcome pack photo which describes what the panels do (heat some of the water in the flat to help with bills).

My gut says it's probably ok, I've spoken to people who have similar panels on their freeholder's roof and they had no enquiries about them at all. However I wanted to get further opinions here. Has anyone got any advice or opinions? I do want the flat and the seller will most likely re market if go and try to get the lease changed.

Thank you!

ProDave

Solar THERMAL is a means of heating your hot water for free. There is no FIT or MCS certificate for this and won't be subject to a rent a roof scheme.

Just buy the flat and enjoy (in summer at least) free hot water.

But like any other part of your hot water system it will be your responsibility to maintain it, which at the very least will be a periodic replacement of the antifreeze that circulates through the on roof collector panels.

jamesh2702

I did think that at one point.

It seems like they can be mcs certified according to this:
microgenerationcertification.org/mcs-standards/installer-standards/solar-thermal

Apparently these were installed the year before mcs became a thing though.

davidmcn

jamesh2702 wrote: »

The response was put to the lender which just pointed to the guidelines around leased solar panels which wasn't applicable here (my solicitor went back to them three times but they basically said it was up to him).

So what has he said he plans to report to the lender?

My solicitor has said to me I have two options - I ask for a deed of variation where the lease would be amended to include who is responsible, who owns them etc etc or I take it on the chin and go ahead with the purchase with the information we have. He mentioned he looked into indemnity insurance but they wouldn't insure without an mcs certificate.

And what advice has he given you about the respective risks/benefits of those options? Not sure this is really as big as issue as e.g. granting a lease for panels on the roof of a freehold house.

jamesh2702

I don't think he will go back to the lender now as they've said as long as it adheres to the guidelines around leased solar panels then it's essentially his call.

My solicitor said that if you get a picky buyer in the future it could be an issue. If I want the peace of mind then to ask for the lease alteration.

I'm not 100% convinced anyone on either side of the purchase knows exactly what they are talking about here.

I don't want the purchase to fall through (which it will if I ask for the deed of variation as the sellers are fed up) but I do want to know the likelihood of having an issue in the future (the agent tells me there have been many sales in the building without issue). Surely this would have been picked up 10 years ago when the flat was built by one of the 30 or so flats in the building if it was an issue.

eddddy

From what you say, it sounds like the problem is:

• Nobody is obliged to do maintenance and repairs to the solar panels

• Nobody is obligated to pay for any maintenance and repairs that is done to the solar panels

... because there is nothing in the lease(s) about it.

But it sounds like the management company is voluntarily doing maintenance and repairs, and presumably the leaseholder(s) are voluntarily paying - which is fine.

But if the management co decides they don't want to do the maintenance/repairs on them anymore, and/or a leaseholder decides they don't want to pay anymore - I guess no work will be done and the the solar panels will be left to fall into disuse.

If you don't mind that potentially happening, I guess everything is fine.

Are the solar panels just for the benefit of one flat, or are they used by all the flats?

(FWIW, I suspect that getting a lease variation would be impossible. Every lease in the building might need to be varied. So you'd need to get agreement from every leaseholder and the freeholder.)

jamesh2702

Yes that's correct although the management agent say they pay for the maintenance and the letter they've sent from a maintenance visit seems to indicate this.

Each flat supposedly has one panel. There are 10 flats connected to the panels. Although it looks from google maps like there are 14 panels.

Agree on the lease point - I don't think that's an option.

I'm not too concerned about them when living there, it's more trying to sell knowing that we don't have all the information.

jamesh2702

Does anyone have any further thoughts? I can’t help but feel it’s not that big of a deal.

eddddy

jamesh2702 wrote: »

Yes that's correct although the management agent say they pay for the maintenance and the letter they've sent from a maintenance visit seems to indicate this.

Yes - but probably only until...

• A leaseholder challenges the service charge and says "I'm not paying for work on the solar panels, because my lease doesn't require me to"

• There's a new freeholder, who decides not to do any work on the solar panels - because the lease doesn't require them to.

• The current freeholder changes their mind for some reason

But taking a step back - all the above assumes that the solar panels were installed after the leases were granted (hence there is no mention of them in the lease).

Or were they installed before the leases were granted (e.g. when the flats were converted)? That might make the situation different.

jamesh2702

Or were they installed before the leases were granted (e.g. when the flats were converted)? That might make the situation different.

I believe it's this one. The agent keeps repeating they were done as part of the initial flats being built. So the buildings insurance covers them he says as they were signed off as part of this.

davidmcn

Even if added after the original construction, that doesn't necessarily mean there's a problem - any sensibly-drafted lease will cover the possibility of new-fangled things being installed at a later date (door entry systems, cable/satellite tv, etc). What exactly does your solicitor think the legal difficulty is?

Or does he just think solar panels are somehow suspicious and he should try to shift the responsibility onto you / your lender to tell him it's fine to proceed, even though you don't understand what the problem is either?