x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by rosalind renshaw

The RICS says home owners who have rented out their roof space to solar energy companies could be blighting their properties when they come to sell.

The warning came after the Government announced it is to slash solar incentives and halve its feed-in tariffs.

The RICS says home owners who have already been tempted by the prospect of income, could have created enormous risks for themselves by renting out roof space.

Many leases run for up to 25 years without a break clause, which could put off prospective buyers who do not want to keep the panels.

Home owners may also have unwittingly violated the terms of their mortgage by signing a lease which is not acceptable to the lender.

In addition, RICS has warned that installers are not yet subject to formal regulation, so people could find the installation has created structural damage.

David Dalby, residential director at the RICS, said: “While we wholeheartedly support the use and production of green energy, it is important that consumers are aware of the potential dangers before entering into these agreements.”

Meanwhile, the ‘green’ industry has expressed its despair at the Government’s announcement that it is to halve its subsidies in December.

Chris Hopkins of Ploughcroft, a solar supplier, said: “The rate of the proposed FIT cut did come as a shock. We always knew the rate would be reduced as the solar industry boomed, but we did not expect it to be halved. All of the current news seems to be destructive, and this will only destroy consumers’ confidence in the solar market.”

However, he forecast that some good might come out of the ‘solar slashing’.

He said: “Companies that entered the solar industry purely to join in the solar gold rush are unethical and unsustainable. The current FIT makes it too good to be true for them, and the proposed lower FIT rate will mean they cease to exist. Long term, this is good for the industry as we need companies who are committed to the renewable cause.”

Jim Gillespie, founder of the Institute of Domestic Energy Assessors (IDEA) and also director of installation company 1st 4 Solar, said there had been no consultation by the Government, which he accused of being underhand.

He said DEAs up and down the country had lost faith in the Green Deal and in the Government.

His comments are here:

https://whatstheidea.org.uk/blog/



 

Comments

  • icon

    'nick':
    "Send them to me and I will explain the advantages of solar panels properly so they will see them for the assett they truly are."
    "No I am not an installer I just collect £1300 pa from my roof and get fed up with all the negative comments on this site."

    That being the case, Sir, then I respectfully suggest that you are far from being the 'right' person to be telling people what is right or wrong for them.

    Collecting a few quid versus potential losses far in excess of the short-term gains?

    How would you quantify potential losses? How would you explain the VERY REAL possibility of loss of value - or even non-saleability in future?

    Or would you simply push the "cake today" argument you have used here so far - the logical form of argument that would be used by someone with a vested interest...?

    • 10 November 2011 12:57 PM
  • icon

    Hi @ Nick,
    No I am not an installer I just collect £1300 pa from my roof and get fed up with all the negative comments on this site. Some times the glass is half full.
    Nick.

    • 09 November 2011 10:51 AM
  • icon

    As a pose to more BS from another cowboy solar panel fitter who obviously has a vested interest in people buying them.

    • 05 November 2011 11:41 AM
  • icon

    Freezing what is there to freez? I bet you are thinking of those sill water warmers.
    You are very lucky to have countless people to put off. Send them to me and I will explain the advantages of solar panels properly so they will see them for the assett they truly are.
    Just more bulsh from some one who doesn't have a skoobydoo.

    • 04 November 2011 16:33 PM
  • icon

    You must be new to this site Steve or you would know the pillock posting as rantrave is always right, don't argue!

    • 04 November 2011 14:00 PM
  • icon

    Sold a house on two occasions and the solar panels were eyed with suspicion. Talk of freezing in the winter and leaks in general put countless people off.

    Another local one got frozen and had major problems as a sale was in the offing and they were stripped out as quick as they could get to them.

    Still as we move along things change as do fashions etc etc so maybe one day.................

    • 04 November 2011 13:58 PM
  • icon

    Never heard of 100% mortgages? Or even 125% ones? I'm not trying to make a big point though - as you say, tongue in cheek.

    There are some stunning inconsistencies said though by Joe public on the subject of house prices. Take the guy who says high house prices are good and then whinges about today's fuel costs. The latter is a direct consequence of the former through today's low interest rates.

    Ditto for homeowners who like high house prices but complain about govt meddling in free markets. The number of govt props supporting current house prices is quite significant...

    This is seriously off-topic in relation to the article though, which I don't want to detract discussion from.

    • 04 November 2011 12:26 PM
  • icon

    I know rantnrave's comment is tongue in cheek but I can't resist pointing out that "unearned equity" still required an investment of capital to buy the asset in the first place.

    So its not "something for nothing". I'm with Ray on this one.

    So there :-)

    • 04 November 2011 12:04 PM
  • icon

    Any one lucky enough to have already installed solar panels and locked in the massive and index linked returns of 43.3p per Kwp will not find that this is a blight on their property. Think what the situation will be in five or ten years when electricity is massively expensive and they come to sell their house. Wow! I cannot really hear any prospective buyers say, “what, you have free electricity?” or “you are getting money back from your solar panels which is more than your total electricity bill? I am not buying this property I will buy the one down the road with massive bills.”
    Rics are being their normal optimistic selves. They always see the good in every thing don’t they? Get the panels whilst you can and smirk behind your hand.

    • 04 November 2011 10:38 AM
  • icon

    "Something for nothing? Never!"

    So you're against unearned equity then Ray?

    ; )

    • 04 November 2011 10:21 AM
  • icon

    Anyone know what safeguards are in place to ensure that the homeowner and not a tenant signs a contract?

    I can imagine tenants would love to have free panels and discounted electricity, and some of them would happily sign a contract to rent out their landlord's roof space.

    The fact that the contract would ultimately be unenforceable wouldn't be much consolation to a landlord when he was trying to unravel it all and get the panels removed.

    • 04 November 2011 09:58 AM
  • icon

    ........."home owners who have rented out their roof space to solar energy companies could be blighting their properties when they come to sell".....

    This was obvious from the start. I always recommended not to do it unless one could afford it themselves and stayed in complete control of the instalation etc.. Something for nothing? Never!

    • 04 November 2011 09:40 AM
  • icon

    I await with interest the debate on the added value of solar panel and wind turbines to domestic homes.

    I am uncertain as to what to add to the value for these obvious aspects of value

    Anyone have any ideas?

    • 04 November 2011 08:48 AM
  • icon

    You have to read "bungling" Jim Gillespies blog post with the emal he sent ot Chris Huhne - its a classic. No wonder Jim has the hump - could this spell the end for his solar panel company?

    • 04 November 2011 08:34 AM
MovePal MovePal MovePal