Solar Panels- FIT rights

carriden15

I’ve been trying to fathom out the legality of purchasing a home where:
The solar panels have been paid for BUT the FIT was never bought.
The FIT “purchase” cost is quite excessive.

Who ( if anyone) is legally liable for the purchase cost ….the seller or the buyer? 

What,  if any, future ramifications could there be for re sale, maintenance of roof & solar panels? 

A simple reply would be much appreciated, as I’ve found this whole debacle a nightmare! 

TIA

Keep_pedalling

If the owners purchased the panels they would be entitled to the FIT payments unless for some unfathomable reason they assigned those payments to a third party, so sounds more like a rent a roof installation. 

Who pays is really down to negotiation, you could simply reduce your offer to allow you to buy off the third party. How long have the FIT payments left to run, and how much compensation do the third party want. 

Reed_Richards

It must be a "rent-a-roof" scheme.  The home owner would have been offered free solar panels and all the electricity from them that they could use but the company that did the installation got the Feed-In Tariff payments.  Some mortgage lenders don't like these schemes, somebody else's panels on your roof.  So buying out the company that owns the panels and collects the FIT would solve the problem.  You would need to consult your conveyancer and see what your mortgage lender says.  And negotiate with the vendor about who pays the cost of the buy-out, if that is what you decide/need to do.

Edit:  if I'm correct then the solar panels have not been paid-for, as you have been told.  If you own the panels then you own the right to the FIT.    

Ectophile

I think there have been schemes where someone installs solar panels on your roof for free, but in return you sign over the FIT entitlements to them.

This is subtly different from "rent a roof" in the way the contract is worded, but the end result is much the same.

carriden15

Thanks for your comments.
The panels were originally purchased on a Government “Green Scheme”, they were installed at a reduced price ( which was paid up over a few years and finalised at the point of re sale) but the FIT rights were owned by a third party, who have since collapsed and the rights now owned by a Canadian based company! 
There is a reduction in energy cost but the residual energy is owned by the Canadian Company.
Does anyone know if it’s legal to sell a house in this situation? 

Hoenir

No reason for it to illegal. Assuming all neccessary consents were obtained. 

Reed_Richards

Under the FIT scheme you get paid according to the amount of solar power that your panels generate.  It doesn't matter if the householder uses some, all, or none of this generated electricity, the FIT payment is exactly the same.  It seems that the FIT payments for the house you are looking at were assigned to some company, which seems a pretty raw deal if the householder still had to pay for the panels.  There were other schemes around where you paid nothing and still got the same benefits.

You can legally sell a house in any condition but you may not be able to get a mortgage to buy one.   

Keep_pedalling

How long have the FIT payments left to run, and how much compensation do the third party want? How many panels?

MWT

carriden15 said:

Who ( if anyone) is legally liable for the purchase cost ….the seller or the buyer? 

What,  if any, future ramifications could there be for re sale, maintenance of roof & solar panels? 

A simple reply would be much appreciated, as I’ve found this whole debacle a nightmare! 

There is no simple answer unfortunately.

There is no specific liability for the cost to purchase back the FiT rights, that is up to whoever wants to own them.

The ramifications are exactly the ones you are facing now, do you want to buy the house without the FiT rights and any obligations that are attached to the original agreement in respect of the panels etc.

wrf12345

I had the free panels on a house I have sold but the company included two free removals and refit if it needed, for instance, a new roof and there was no problem getting a mortgage for the new buyer. This one sounds like it was sold by someone who used to sell double-glazing before FENSA (even now nothing to stop someone paying two to three times the going rate). Possibly the lawyer can set up indemnity insurance as extra protection for the mortgage company at the vendor's cost. Probably not worth buying back the FIT rights as the price will be whatever the seller can get away with but great to have all that free electricity - the one area to watch out for, liability for failure of things like the inverter which might cost a grand or two to fix, and if not fixed might make the owner liable for the FIT payments.