Latest on the court challenge!!!

[GaryM]

A company gave me two prices 7k for 2.5kw system at 21p but if rate was 43p it would be 9.2k, I was told all down to supply and demand of panel pushing up prices. I said sounded more like you think I'll make more so will be happy if you take a bigger cut? .......Silence.

Anyway told the company I had cheaper quotes from companies guaranteeing quote for 30 days.

I'd have done the same. Cheeky ****ers!
OOI my quote was £9.5K for 4kW. Not sure where that stands on value at 21p (still a good return though) but it's excellent value should I manage to obtain 43.3p at some point.

 

[SRE]

I'm getting a bit of a complex - my phone isn't ringing of it's hook. Just as well cos I've lost my voice but nothing more than normal in the way of calls today :-(

 

[powervan]

I'm getting a bit of a complex - my phone isn't ringing of it's hook. Just as well cos I've lost my voice but nothing more than normal in the way of calls today :-(

Sorry SRE but ive put the word out ur in SAN FRAN CISCO )))))))

 

[TallPaul]

Responsible installers should only be quoting you the 21p price, and responsible suppliers should be holding their price on kit - as mine are. It's the stock levels that will be rapidly depleted by chancers trying to speculate. You could still get a 4kWp system sub £10k if you act fast (memories of November spring to mind) if you are happy with the 21p rate - but please contact your preferred supplier immediately to avoid the 1st April uncertainty that we are yet to face!​

Yes the smaller companies have included a table with both 21p and 43p, BUT, there quote was before today's antics. The "big" electric company just did 21p, their figures looked bad (compared to other 21p calcs) but I think they have a more accurate measurement of direction as roof is SE but more ESE than SSE which skews year KHW and hence payback timescale. 4KWp systems I am asking for quotes on are coming in around 10K but that's with Chinese panels, more like £12K with Sanyo HIT, both with decent invertors like SMA (well I think SMA is decent, see plenty of posts about them being quality gear on here - which is why I joined to read up). To add to all this you have to wonder which suppliers will be around in a year if you need a guarantee repair, and then which panel providers you can track down in 10 years if peak output is below 90% or over the rest of the 25 years. This pushes you towards Sanyo etc but then you get into panel availability problems etc. No one has mentioned short supply yet, see how the rest of the week pans out!

 

[SRE]

Sorry SRE but ive put the word out ur in SAN FRAN CISCO )))))))

Postponed again til September in case there's a rush. Got to have been the most expensive holiday we've ever booked! Lets hope the phone starts ringing to compensate!

 

[Gavin A]

No one has mentioned short supply yet, see how the rest of the week pans out!

sanyos are in short supply fwiw.

 

[SolarCity]

It seems to me that the government and DECC are trying to win by attrition. People are already saying that they're happy with 21p and want to carry on with that.

To be honest, I'd love to see how they make it look attractive to customers.

I can't run a business doing 20 surveys a week and selling one system a month.

 

[SRE]

Confirmation that there is no guaranteed 43p - sell at this rate at your peril - I certainly won't be.
http://www.realassurance.org.uk/pdf/briefing-on-losing-fits-appeal.pdf

 

[finchy]

on the REAL website it say's "The Court of Appeal's ruling means the FIT rate for <4kW systems installed and registered ahead of the new 3 March cut-off point is 43.3p. Consumers who register on or after 3 March will qualify for the current higher rate until 1 April, it will then drop to 21p for the remainder of the 25 years"

I'm sure they mean from 12 December to 3rd March .....?what a complete F8888up ! Heads need to role

 

[SolarCity]

"We have no current plans to close the scheme but cannot rule out any option at this stage. "

I have forever loathed the Tories and I cannot wait to get these slimy cretins out of government. How dare they add this threat into their feeble explanation for acting unlawfully.

Greenest government ever?

Another letter to my Lib Dem MP this afternoon is in order.

 

[SolarCity]

I'm sure they mean from 12 December to 3rd March .....?what a complete F8888up ! Heads need to roll

Starting with Greg Barker's.

His smug, arrogant featureless face is enough to make me reach for a meat cleaver in an spontaneous murderous rage.

 

[Somecamel]

I would love to be able to write to my MP and get an honest answer.....

My MP is Greg Barker!

 

[Somecamel]

Energy and Climate Ministers in the Commons this morning!!

Player

Watch it live-

I need to make my 10 o clock appointment very quick

 

[Earthstore]

Here is how I see it, for what it is worth.
Greg Barking's legal argument according to the link (thanks SRE) seems to be that the current rate is unsustainable, well this may be the case, however the judgement's were the way in which the government made the changes was/is unlawful.
It is not the decision of any judge in the land to decide if there is enough "money in the pot" it is only for them to decide if the way the changes were made were lawful, and clearly they were not.

Also they play with figures, saying how much electricity bills will rise, so it's not government funded then is it?
If it were government funded it would not affect any bills at all.

 

[SolarCity]

Absolutely agree. I can't carry out an unlawful act simply because my money is running out.

I'd either make sure I didn't end up in that mess in the first place OR would find the money from elsewhere.

 

[pogson6]

[h=3]will anything interesting be said? ...[/h]
Today, 10:30 on BBC Parliament


[h=2]Synopsis[/h] Live coverage of questions in the House of Commons to Energy and Climate Change secretary Chris Huhne and his ministerial team.

 

[mdovey]

Oh, that document makes interesting reading:

"This means that as the law currently stands, we cannot legislate to apply new tariffs, from 1 April 2012, to installations which became eligible for FITs on or after 12 December 2011."

If that sentence doesn't make it entirely clear that any such legislation would be retrospective, then the following later in the document makes it very clear:

"If our appeal were successful, we could legislate in future to apply new tariffs to installations that became eligible for FITs from a December 2011 reference date."

This following is more worrying:

"Nor does it preclude us from taking forward other proposals from the FITs consultation (e.g. new energy efficiency requirement)."

Now whilst I agree that FOE et al shouldn't back down over the court case as it sets a bad precedence for retrospective action during a consultation which shouldn't be allowed by any government department , I am beginning to worry that it is becoming a distraction from the for more important issue of the EPC rating. The proposed EPC C requirement may be far more damaging to the industry than the question of whether the reduced FIT should apply from 12/12 or 3/3

 

[The Solar King]

Anyone else notice that the BPVA supported the Government in Court? Be aware this is not a true association but a business owned by an individual. They seem to provide marketing services. As a member you could not vote this individual off or have a say in opinions put out on your behalf. They also scuppered a challenge in the House of Lords last year by giving ill informed and ill conceived information to a Peer. Not a supporter of Our Solar Future either.

All the real work is done by The Solar Trade Association. This is policy, technical standards, lobbying and much much more. All the big hitters belong, and work for the benefit of the industry.

Huhne has just praised these weasles in Parliament. That says it all. They are traitors. If you are a member, resign now.

 

[FB.]

The "big" electric company just did 21p, their figures looked bad (compared to other 21p calcs) but I think they have a more accurate measurement of direction as roof is SE but more ESE than SSE which skews year KHW and hence payback timescale.

In the calculations which companies use to provide an indication of returns, some make higher (or lower) assumptions for loss of panel output over the years, some take into account a replacement inverter (or two) and also they use different rates of inflation for electricity prices and general inflation (to which the FiT) is linked.

Therefore if you can't strip-out the influence of all the variables, it may be better just to look at the quality, price and peak output potential of each company's offering.

 

[TallPaul]

Therefore if you can't strip-out the influence of all the variables, it may be better just to look at the quality, price and peak output potential of each company's offering.

I think that's good advice thanks, I had pretty much decided to just compare the quotes with Sanyo panels and SMA inverters and hope for the best with the results!

Anyone explain why a big name company would spec a SMA SB3300 for a 4KWp system though? Roof is SE or ESE so maybe they expect the panels never to produce full output?