Solar panel Miss-sell

Alderbank

@Coppice10, could you expand a little more on 'Ad no £1000 cashback from Barclays for doing the work which was an incentive' please?

if you are saying that you have applied for and actually been refused this cashback because of some irregularity with the certificate, that would be a clear and quantifiable loss.

Coppice10

The installer turned out to be conman and a convicted criminal - so im not going to discuss a route forward with him.  He was not MCS certified.  The guarantee is also in the name of the electrician, and the website for the guarantee clearly states they must be the contract holder for it to be valid. Then there is the £1000 from barclays that i can no longer qualify for, as well as MCS CONFIRMING my cert is invalid. So - i am convinced i have a real issue and not making too much of this.

Leaving aside whether you think its an issue or not, which is the best route forward? DIY Section 75 or use the expert witness and a solicitor?

born_again

Coppice10 said:

ComicGeek said:

Coppice10 said:

@comicgeek - exactly that - the MCS certificate and the insurance backed guarantee are both not worth the paper they were written on. You have to be the contract holder in order to issue them and the front man held the contract - not the approved electrician. So despite being issued, they have been issued incorrectly and cant be relied upon.  Subsequent information which has come to light leads me to think the front man knew this but is actually a shady character and was cutting corners.    Leaving customers high and dry...hence the question about what approach to take re the solicitors/expert witness.  Thank you

I don't believe that's correct, plenty of installers use third party installers - the MCS requirements are that the products used are certified, and that the system has been commissioned by a MCS certified installation company. That happens on most/all new builds where there are multiple subcontractors employed.

If you have the MCS certificate in hand then you can register the export side with electricity companies, so there's no proven loss there. You can check the legitimacy of the certificate with MCS directly.

If you are concerned about the quality of the installation, are there particular issues that you are concerned with? You could always raise concerns directly with MCS.

Without any specific concerns I don't see either the Section 75 or court getting you any where. 

Not quite true. The MCS certificate  must be issued by the MCS accredited person AND BE THE CONTRACT HOLDER. Same with the Insurance backed guarantee.    This is not how mine is structured.  I was sold a set-up with this paperwork in place, and they are not valid - i have spoken to MCS and confirmed it.  The rules on how to flowdown and subcontract work were not followed.

So what was their advice on the issue, & how to resolve? As well as what are they going to do about this person breaking their rules?

I would talk to CC & see what they say. As does appear to be breach of contract or misrepresentation. They will tall you want would be needed to take forward.

user1977

Coppice10 said:

The installer turned out to be conman and a convicted criminal - so im not going to discuss a route forward with him.

I expect a court would decide that you ought to allow him an opportunity to resolve matters before you're allowed to claim all your costs in getting somebody else involved.

Coppice10

So the installers advice was that he would get the contract reissued in the name of the electrician and backdate it all. Which is fraudulent.  And dont forget my cc payment & bank transfer would still have been sent to the original installer so it wouldn't change anything! As i say, turns out this chap is a conman and a criminal who has served time for defrauding little old ladies - he changed the spelling of his name to avoid detection when doing due diligence. 
There is no other way for him to put it right though - he doesn't hold accreditation himself and never will. So there is no fix that i can see....

Ectophile

The problem is that you've stirred up a problem that appears to be insoluble.

Most people would have just taken the MCS certificate and guarantee and never have questioned it.  The MCS certificate would have allowed export payments, and nobody at any of the energy companies would ever have questioned it.  Why would you question a certificate that was issued by someone who was authorised to issue them?

RefluentBeans

I think the question that you originally asked still remains unanswered - whether you should pursue via a S75 claim or go to small claims (with or without ‘expert testimony’ and a NWNF lawyer). 

The first thing I would say is that this is clearly a very complex case - and the damages you have encountered are tricky to calculate, but nevertheless are real. A S75 claim does not necessarily prevent you from claiming via SCC.

Looking at the small claims route - the issue you will have is that the business could just fold - and the money that could be awarded suddenly becomes a lot harder to get. This person you’ve painted as a conman could close shop the day before court and all of a sudden you’ll have to persuade a judge to allow you sue him personally which is tricky, and a whole other issue to deal with. On top of that, if the bloke hasn’t got the money you will find it difficult to claim anything back. 

Looking at using a NWNF - they don’t just take cases based on the likelihood of winning (they have to have a 51% chance of winning) but also on whether the other party could pay up. If this person is truly a conman they may just not take the case because it’s going to be tricky to win/actual recovery would be tricky. On top of that NWNF make their money by charging a lot of the winnings you may (or may not) get. Good if you don’t care about the money, bad if you need money to actually repair the damages. 

Additionally, small claims (for claims of up to 10k) is designed to be used without formal legal representation. The court is a lot more accessible than the sort of court you see on TV. You may want to keep the story simple, the facts clear, and without bias, and try to tell a convincing story. You could of course ask for legal advice from solicitors, and this may well help you decide what the next step should be - whether you need to let the contractor attempt a repair (whatever that may look like) or whether you can just go to court. They could also advise you on realistic damages that are defensible (e.g. I can’t claim that my emotional well-being was affected and so I should get £5mn - it would be ruled very strongly against me, unless I can evidence how that is a mitigated loss). 

Going back to the S75 claim - this could be too complicated for them. But the banks do like to read the contracts etc, so you may well be in luck.  If they rule there is a valid claim, you haven’t got to worry about where they get their money from - they will just give you the money back and anything after that is the banks concern. However, again the banks will likely try a chargeback first (which likely would fail as the services have been rendered; and chargebacks are a crude way of dealing with issues); and they then may investigate the situation. This will take time, and given the complexity, probably take a good long time. 

I think you need to be realistic about what you want in terms of a remedy. Whilst I know you said an MCS certificate is impossible - then what is the actual impact of that? The 2 year insurance others have mentioned is only worth what comparative insurance costs. The certification isn’t a requirement for building work, right? So it’s unlikely you could argue that the cost should be uninstalling and reinstalling the panels. Can you still sell the excess electric back to the grid? If so, for the same price or for less? If not, how much would you be projected to make as a revenue source from that? How much more value does having a MCS certified install add to the value of the house compared to a non-MCS install? 

All those figures will be scrutinised, and so you should be able to defend your figures. If you are asking for the cost of tearing it all down and reinstalling it, properly, then you will need to show why that is the case. And I think that’s a very high bar to set. I’m by no means an expert on this (I have only just heard of MCS certification) - but the numbers will need to be independent - not directly lifted from MCS. MCS is ultimately a private company - their job is to sell people on why having an MCS installation is better than not. You will need to try and find the actual cost of not having an MCS installation compared to an MCS installation, and the loss of the certification. That difference is what, I believe, you should be claiming for. Anything else I think is unrealistic. 

Coppice10

Ectophile said:

The problem is that you've stirred up a problem that appears to be insoluble.

Most people would have just taken the MCS certificate and guarantee and never have questioned it.  The MCS certificate would have allowed export payments, and nobody at any of the energy companies would ever have questioned it.  Why would you question a certificate that was issued by someone who was authorised to issue them?

I didnt question it originally. The same installer did a terrible install for someone else, who then started digging, who then shared their findings amongst other customers. These findings were that the installer was not authorised to issue the cert - so its invalid. I cant unknow the information now its been shared with me. Believe me i think i would have rather carried on in blissful ignorance!!