Plans to change what households make from solar Feed-in Tariffs 'feels a breach of pro

MSE_Clare

If you're one of the 800,000+ households in England, Wales or Scotland being paid to generate your own electricity via renewable technology under the Feed-In Tariff scheme, you could earn less in the long run under new Government plans. 

Martin Lewis: Plans to change what households make from solar Feed-in Tariffs 'feels a breach of promise'

If you haven't already, join the forum to reply.

ppppenguin

When I signed up for FIT, both parties agreed to RPI indexing for 25 years. Regardless of fairness or accuracy, a contract is a contract and cannot be changed unilaterally by one party after the event. It is fundamentally dishonest to attempt to change the terms of contract part way through. It is also an abuse of power, using the overwhelming power of government against parties who, for the most part are private individuals of limited means who have limited ability to fight this in the courts.

In any case, it's a historic matter, as there have be no new FIT contracts since 2019.

MattMattMattUK

All seems a bit overblown, everyone I know on FIT thinks the government got it wrong and it has been an absolute gravy train, no real world people seem bothered.

Ectophile

ppppenguin said:

When I signed up for FIT, both parties agreed to RPI indexing for 25 years. Regardless of fairness or accuracy, a contract is a contract and cannot be changed unilaterally by one party after the event. It is fundamentally dishonest to attempt to change the terms of contract part way through. It is also an abuse of power, using the overwhelming power of government against parties who, for the most part are private individuals of limited means who have limited ability to fight this in the courts.

In any case, it's a historic matter, as there have be no new FIT contracts since 2019.

It's nothing compared with the SERPS (State Earnings Related Pension Scheme) and S2P (State Second Pension) schemes.  Every month, the government took money out of people's pay packets to pay for an extra pension on top of the basic state pension.  Then they scrapped the whole thing and replaced it with a flat rate for everybody, regardless of how much you paid in.

ITalfie

The Government are also going to pay less interest on gilts because of the "black hole" in the budget. Let's see how that goes. 

Ex_Executor_49

I agree with ppppenguin - a contract is a contract.  I think the government consultation is a sham. It asks: 'Option1: Do you want to switch your annual increases from RPI to the lower CPI rate now, or Option 2: Do you want to have no increases until CPI catches up with the current RPI (in about 10 years).  I want to stick with annual increase in line with RPI.  

MWT

ppppenguin said:

When I signed up for FIT, both parties agreed to RPI indexing for 25 years. Regardless of fairness or accuracy, a contract is a contract and cannot be changed unilaterally by one party after the event. It is fundamentally dishonest to attempt to change the terms of contract part way through. It is also an abuse of power, using the overwhelming power of government against parties who, for the most part are private individuals of limited means who have limited ability to fight this in the courts.

In any case, it's a historic matter, as there have be no new FIT contracts since 2019.

My understanding is that the original contract included the right for the Government to review/change the indexing method... 

dunstonh

Ectophile said:

ppppenguin said:

When I signed up for FIT, both parties agreed to RPI indexing for 25 years. Regardless of fairness or accuracy, a contract is a contract and cannot be changed unilaterally by one party after the event. It is fundamentally dishonest to attempt to change the terms of contract part way through. It is also an abuse of power, using the overwhelming power of government against parties who, for the most part are private individuals of limited means who have limited ability to fight this in the courts.

In any case, it's a historic matter, as there have be no new FIT contracts since 2019.

It's nothing compared with the SERPS (State Earnings Related Pension Scheme) and S2P (State Second Pension) schemes.  Every month, the government took money out of people's pay packets to pay for an extra pension on top of the basic state pension.  Then they scrapped the whole thing and replaced it with a flat rate for everybody, regardless of how much you paid in.

That is not correct.

With the change to the NSP, everyone who was contracted in retained their built-up entitlement under the old system.     
And those who contracted out also retained their contracted-out benefits.

Plenty of people with contracted entitlements obtain a higher amount than the maximum NSP because they straddle multiple qualifying periods.     Only those born this millennium will be fully under the NSP regime (assuming no further changes).

And those who contracted out have done very well out of it.    
The biggest winners are the self-employed, who previously only qualified for the basic state pension and couldn't build SERPS/S2P entitlements because they paid lower NI.   

The_Green_Hornet

Like most Government consultations they are just going through the motions to avoid any legal challenges down the line.

They have already decided the outcome.

Scot_39

ppppenguin said:

When I signed up for FIT, both parties agreed to RPI indexing for 25 years. Regardless of fairness or accuracy, a contract is a contract and cannot be changed unilaterally by one party after the event. It is fundamentally dishonest to attempt to change the terms of contract part way through. It is also an abuse of power, using the overwhelming power of government against parties who, for the most part are private individuals of limited means who have limited ability to fight this in the courts.

In any case, it's a historic matter, as there have be no new FIT contracts since 2019.

Historic doesn't mean that people arent being paid now a relatively silly amount for their FIT - compared to current market rates.

And especially collapsing dynamic rates during low demand periods - mid morning and mid afternoon.

And as of Feb this year - even grid level solar farms were beginning to be be paid curtailment - because there wasnt the demand and or grid capacity to deal with the power.

Overall - the POTENTIAL energy generation - from renewables on windy sunny summer days and other core non load following generation like c5GW nuclear in the UK is massively over at least summer - most reelvant to solar actual generation - is FIT seasonal (I thought not) - demand - and many already on SEG have seen solar rates cut accordingly at all but peak - say 4-7pm - times in some cases.

And if as the Q in the other posts suggests its purely a RPI to CPI - chances are those rates will remain largely out of sync with the market place.

How much is it expected to save ?

As in the global scheme of things - with grid level thermal curtailment heading towards £3bn and total balancing - grid thermal, load and gas replacement type costs - heading towards £8bn by 2030 - and the 3 TNOS spending £10-15bn pa on new grid that we pay to finance - cannot help think this seems likely low lying fruit.

But the others - such as rewriting renewables contracts to ban curtailment payments for instance - would involve a radical rethink - and jeopardize Milibands all consuming (accelerated vs many comparable nations) rush to 95% by 2030 renewables target.

matt_drummer

I can't see what the big deal is?

They are not going back in time and adjusting the past, nobody will have to pay anything back.

The rates will not reduce, they will either go up by a slightly smaller percentage each year in future or stay as they are now for a while.

Hardly the end of the world is it?