Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Jenny
    • By MSE Jenny 21st Dec 11, 5:31 PM
    • 1,243Posts
    • 3,577Thanks
    MSE Jenny
    MSE news: Government solar panel plans legally flawed
    • #1
    • 21st Dec 11, 5:31 PM
    MSE news: Government solar panel plans legally flawed 21st Dec 11 at 5:31 PM
    This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

    Last edited by MSE Jenny; 21-12-2011 at 6:00 PM.
Page 1
    • wymondham
    • By wymondham 21st Dec 11, 6:19 PM
    • 5,907 Posts
    • 11,606 Thanks
    wymondham
    • #2
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:19 PM
    • #2
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:19 PM
    does this mean that the 12 december deadline moves??
    • magyar
    • By magyar 21st Dec 11, 6:20 PM
    • 18,389 Posts
    • 30,446 Thanks
    magyar
    • #3
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:20 PM
    • #3
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:20 PM
    Whilst I support cutting the tariff level, this High Court judgement was so obviously going to go this way. To run a consultation and then announce a cut in the level of the tariff before the consultation has completed shows a level of idiocy I would have thought even politicians incapable of.

    I don't support small solar, but to put people in a position where they have paid for panels which now get a lower subsidy level is completely wrong.

    Of course, this could potentially open up the floodgates for claims that people cancelled panels on the basis of an unlawful announcement and now could lose out if they cannot re-order. Well done DECC for utterly screwing up as usual.
    Says James, in my opinion, there's nothing in this world
    Beats a '52 Vincent and a red headed girl
    • magyar
    • By magyar 21st Dec 11, 6:21 PM
    • 18,389 Posts
    • 30,446 Thanks
    magyar
    • #4
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:21 PM
    • #4
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:21 PM
    does this mean that the 12 december deadline moves??
    Originally posted by wymondham
    Not in itself, no. But it will put huge pressure on the government to do so and will mean that they could potentially face claims from people who missed out, as well as companies for lost business.
    Says James, in my opinion, there's nothing in this world
    Beats a '52 Vincent and a red headed girl
    • rogerblack
    • By rogerblack 21st Dec 11, 6:36 PM
    • 9,273 Posts
    • 9,438 Thanks
    rogerblack
    • #5
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:36 PM
    • #5
    • 21st Dec 11, 6:36 PM
    If the government announces after the close of the consultation on Friday that the date of Dec 12 for cutoffs did not apply, and the new date is mid-January, as was initially announced, that leaves only a couple of weeks neglecting christmas and new-year.
    Add to this the fact that it's now potentially snowy in some areas, which will make installing panels challenging, and the difficulty in turning a tap back on with regards to panels and equipment supply, the number of new possible installs may not be that large.

    The doubling of the existing install-base in the 6 weeks before Dec 12 shows how foolish it would have been to do nothing, and change the rates in april.
    • Ectophile
    • By Ectophile 21st Dec 11, 7:34 PM
    • 3,981 Posts
    • 2,645 Thanks
    Ectophile
    • #6
    • 21st Dec 11, 7:34 PM
    • #6
    • 21st Dec 11, 7:34 PM
    If the government announces after the close of the consultation on Friday that the date of Dec 12 for cutoffs did not apply, and the new date is mid-January, as was initially announced, that leaves only a couple of weeks neglecting christmas and new-year.
    Add to this the fact that it's now potentially snowy in some areas, which will make installing panels challenging, and the difficulty in turning a tap back on with regards to panels and equipment supply, the number of new possible installs may not be that large.

    The doubling of the existing install-base in the 6 weeks before Dec 12 shows how foolish it would have been to do nothing, and change the rates in april.
    Originally posted by rogerblack
    The only reason that there was a sudden rush at the beginning of December was that information had accidentally leaked out that the government was about to cut the tariff. It was supposed to have been fixed until March 2012.

    I was going to get panels installed at the beginning of next year. When I heard about the change, I quickly phoned a local installation company. By employing extra labour, they managed to get the panels installed on the 8th December.
    • mo786uk
    • By mo786uk 21st Dec 11, 8:05 PM
    • 1,358 Posts
    • 573 Thanks
    mo786uk
    • #7
    • 21st Dec 11, 8:05 PM
    • #7
    • 21st Dec 11, 8:05 PM
    I supported the cut but I thought the way they did it was risky so this result is not surprising

    The problem is that the damage has been done to the industry and I doubt it will recover.

    Will be interesting to see wha the Govt does now though.
    • fizio
    • By fizio 22nd Dec 11, 8:24 AM
    • 249 Posts
    • 63 Thanks
    fizio
    • #8
    • 22nd Dec 11, 8:24 AM
    • #8
    • 22nd Dec 11, 8:24 AM
    I'm just hoping this gives those of us with plans to install in the new year another shot at it - though more likely the goverment appeal etc will simply drag on and by then it will be tool late to install by march anyway..
    • rogerblack
    • By rogerblack 22nd Dec 11, 8:40 AM
    • 9,273 Posts
    • 9,438 Thanks
    rogerblack
    • #9
    • 22nd Dec 11, 8:40 AM
    • #9
    • 22nd Dec 11, 8:40 AM
    An additional complication is that the governments consultation outlined an intended return rate of 5% - in well situated areas.
    The 21p figure is well above this.

    For a 4kWp install here in my bit of scotland, this would equal a system costing 15K. In cornwall, 16K.
    Last edited by rogerblack; 22-12-2011 at 8:48 AM.
    • HalloweenJack
    • By HalloweenJack 22nd Dec 11, 9:43 AM
    • 616 Posts
    • 205 Thanks
    HalloweenJack
    except that wholesale prices have fallen 31% or more for equipment since march this year - so if your still being charged 15k for a 4kw system they are laughing all the way to the bank.

    so , i have a question - given installations were peaking at over 100000 a month in november , and if its all `back on` - the money will run out mid feb - who then pays for it? i dont want my bill to increase 500% to pay for it when the money goes and the installations carry on.

    greenhomecompany have allready lowered installation costs because of wholesale price decreases - its the greedy companies like homesun making all the noise when they are making even more money NOW than 2 months ago.
    • Cardew
    • By Cardew 22nd Dec 11, 9:49 AM
    • 28,081 Posts
    • 13,924 Thanks
    Cardew
    except that wholesale prices have fallen 31% or more for equipment since march this year - so if your still being charged 15k for a 4kw system they are laughing all the way to the bank.

    so , i have a question - given installations were peaking at over 100000 a month in november , and if its all `back on` - the money will run out mid feb - who then pays for it? i dont want my bill to increase 500% to pay for it when the money goes and the installations carry on.

    greenhomecompany have allready lowered installation costs because of wholesale price decreases - its the greedy companies like homesun making all the noise when they are making even more money NOW than 2 months ago.
    Originally posted by HalloweenJack
    My reading of post #9 was that the £15k in Scotland and £16k in Cornwall would be the theoretical cost to ensure a 5% return.

    If you get the systems cheaper then the return is higher!
    • HalloweenJack
    • By HalloweenJack 22nd Dec 11, 9:52 AM
    • 616 Posts
    • 205 Thanks
    HalloweenJack
    i read it wrong then - this court ruling is badly flawed (but so is domestic solar as well - 100mw fields in cornwall is better than 500000 houses with a dozen panels on the roof)
    • Cardew
    • By Cardew 22nd Dec 11, 10:33 AM
    • 28,081 Posts
    • 13,924 Thanks
    Cardew
    The irony is the even the(stupid) Friends of the Earth agree that the subsidy - that we pay - is too high. The Government have taken exactly the right action, but the way they have implimented that action is illegal - an appeal has still to be heard.
    • grahamc2003
    • By grahamc2003 22nd Dec 11, 11:22 AM
    • 1,747 Posts
    • 1,373 Thanks
    grahamc2003
    Tbc, the ruling isn't about cutting the fit rate - almost everyone agrees it's got to be cut - but the timing of it.

    I personally don't see a direct link between the date the consultation ends and the date of a fit cut. It's not as if the government will do what the consultation signifies anyhow. I thought the timing was fair - those who had signed up had sufficient time to get the higher fit rate, those who hadn't, or who signed up after the annoucement, would find it hard to meet the deadlines. Fair enough to me, although not to the court.

    Anyhow, the government have appealed the decision, so I expect the 12/12 will stand (and I think it fair if it does).

    I think this whole affair is an indication that most people really don't have deep environmental values (assuming they believe a link between co2 emissions and the death of the planet), and only really want to 'save the planet' if they get a couple of grand a year to do so.
    • jimjames
    • By jimjames 22nd Dec 11, 3:21 PM
    • 13,306 Posts
    • 12,360 Thanks
    jimjames
    My reading of post #9 was that the £15k in Scotland and £16k in Cornwall would be the theoretical cost to ensure a 5% return.

    If you get the systems cheaper then the return is higher!
    Originally posted by Cardew
    Ours in Nov (SE England) cost £9k for just over 3kWp, 4kWp would have been about £1500 more but we couldnt fit on roof. Even at the new FIT rates it is still a reasonable return especially if the install costs drop even further.
    Remember the saying: if it looks too good to be true it almost certainly is.
    • undaunted
    • By undaunted 22nd Dec 11, 3:54 PM
    • 1,862 Posts
    • 964 Thanks
    undaunted
    Only an idiot would believe that you can make a decision mid a supposed consulation period (and to then expect to get it past a Court on top?) Perhaps the lunatics really are running the asylum!
    • grahamc2003
    • By grahamc2003 22nd Dec 11, 4:55 PM
    • 1,747 Posts
    • 1,373 Thanks
    grahamc2003
    Only an idiot would believe that you can make a decision mid a supposed consulation period (and to then expect to get it past a Court on top?) Perhaps the lunatics really are running the asylum!
    Originally posted by undaunted
    Really? Well I expect only an idiot would post the post above with the benefit of hindsight - or perhaps you posted in advance of the court decision that they would be bound to find the process illegal? Care to post in advance of the appeal how it will be judged? (My view is that, as in any court case, it could go either way, but I expect it will overrule the original judgement).

    Anyhow, I, one of your idiots, obviously, still don't see a connection between a consultation period and the timely withdrawal of an obviously unfair distribution of a subsidy when time is of the essence - perhaps you'll be good enough to explain the link.
    • WestonDave
    • By WestonDave 22nd Dec 11, 5:07 PM
    • 5,038 Posts
    • 8,521 Thanks
    WestonDave
    This might end up being one of those cases where the legal outcome is somewhat pyhrric. If as a result of this hearing and a possible failed appeal the Government relents and changes the date to one in say mid January, it will still end up having largely acheived the aims it set out to do. There will be a few people who had instalations that just missed the deadline who will then qualify but beyond that the scheme will have effectively been shut down from the 12th December. Its going to be almost impossible for the installers to claim lost business because based on their pre announcement monthly instal rate they look like having managed to get far more jobs anyway because of the panic caused by the announcement than if the scheme had quietly fizzled out at a later date. Quantifying a loss to make a claim would be almost impossible.
    Adventure before Dementia!
    • grahamc2003
    • By grahamc2003 22nd Dec 11, 5:28 PM
    • 1,747 Posts
    • 1,373 Thanks
    grahamc2003
    Will there be other incentives in the future? The way the energy crisis is going surely there will be?
    Originally posted by Samson brings props down
    Incentives don't often solve crises, they frequently cause them.

    As in this case.
    • Butti
    • By Butti 24th Dec 11, 12:17 AM
    • 4,968 Posts
    • 14,680 Thanks
    Butti
    The problem with changing the rules in the middle of a consultation is it's not legal. We can all debate the level the tariffs should be at and the companies agreed that they should be negotiated down. By unilaterally cutting them though the government has bankrupted a number of companies and destroyed the trust of any investors thinking of supporting green companies.
    Debt LBM (08/09) £11,641. (08/12) £22,734. (9/19 )£3221
    Diary 'Butti's journey : A matter of loaf or death'.
    Diary 2 'The whimsical tale of the Waterbed of Debt'
    35% 35.4% 40.1% off mortgage
    'one day I will be rich and famous…for now I'll just have to settle for being poor and incredibly sexy'. Vimrod Member of MIKE'S MOB
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,853Posts Today

7,441Users online

Martin's Twitter