Jump to content

Solar panels and council housing

Recommended Posts

Hi Rupert_Baehrr

Doing sums...those (very nice???????) people in the Inland Revenue trained me to do sums on my way to becoming a very senior HM Inspector of Taxes. I can do sums!

Like you, I wish I had fought this battle years ago. The heady days of very silly returns are gone but the good days still remain.

Of course installation companies tell porkies. They want to make a quick buck. However,they are also VERY interested in this new extension to council tenants and the better ones are confident that they can meet the requirements of SCC'S solicitors.

The benefits of solar panels are indisputable. What has always been the case is that council tenants are the only group unable to apply for a benefit that they, like everyone, pay for.

That is now about to change...

My dad's phraseology was "as tight as a duck's arse".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this could be rolled out across councils allover the uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed it could be rolled out. That is causing me a small (but worthwhile) delay. I have now had a further email from SCC (I could send it to you if you contact me "at" live cook...if you see what I mean - "cook" needs a little bit of added punctuation). There is, in their own words "no established procedure for applications of this type because we've never had one before". Well, only half of that statement is true. They have had several (perhaps many) such applications in the past...but this is the first one that they have paid attention to.

Accordingly they are developing a procedure so that future applicants will have an easier ride than me. They have already recognised that this can be rolled out. So...

Their engineers have been out to check the integrity of my (their) roof. And have given it the OK to carry the extra (quite minor) weight. The thing is currently with the City solicitor's office with a recommendation from Housing who suggest that the procedure should include things like Installer's accreditation, underwritten guarantees (not warranties), structural integrity and the like.

A further complication (a nice one which is not delaying my application because it will come later) is how to include this in the existing "Right to Improve". There might need to be a change in primary legislation to achieve that but it would be a simple matter. A Statutory Instrument rather than an Act of Parliament.

However, all parties i.e. SCC, installers and, of course, me want to get this exactly right first time so that there will be an established procedure (similar to that for a tenant making a currently allowable improvement). And naturally, that procedure could easily be adapted by any Local Authority.

Currently my biggest problem is getting appropriate installers. Since the protocol must balance the position of all three parties a one man band installer might not be able to hold his own in setting up the protocol fairly. I happen to be a (now retired) lawyer so I can easily hold the tenant's end but I have only so far found one potential installer who is capable of both the installation AND establishing a fair procedure.

Even though I am seeking installation of an array on just one (my) roof, it is almost as if I will have to follow the council's full tendering process.

Luckily for tenants I am very familiar with that procedure because I have been on SCC tendering panels before. Including the ones who selected Kier for repairs and the one that picked the panel that selected the 5 companies for the Decent Homes work.

Obviously it would not be appropriate to state (in a public forum) which comany I have put on my shortlist.

If you do contact me...

 

---------- Post added 25-08-2013 at 15:25 ----------

 

Oh, and one further thing. Someone did ask whether installers tell "porkies". Actually they do. Some naughty, some not so naughty. The naughty ones revolve around that you have to hurry because the FIT is reviewed and possibly changed every two months...and that their system is better than everyone else's!

But one lie that is only slightly naughty is, actually, beneficial. It is quite techie...

Modern solar panels are very efficient. Efficiency ratings of 95% are easily possible. Inverters are a different matter. An inverter is a gizmo that changes low voltage DC into higher (230) volt AC. You can even buy one for your car! (about £15 to get 230v in your car). Inverters are strictly limited as to the current they can carry. So on a very sunny day in mid June the power provided by the panels will exceed the transmission capabilities of the inverter. The excess power will simply be dumped as heat. (Which is exactly what would have happened if all the solar power (in the absence of any panels) had just hit the roof and warmed it up).

That means that the installer can easily tell you the maximum possible output from the system they are selling. That is where they tell the porkies.

There reasoning for lying) is simple. They offer a guaranteed output for the lifetime of the system and that is where they become VERY conservative. Over 20 years, efficiency will drop to, perhaps, 85%. So they quote using 80% from day 1. This lie actually improves the true financial return. They also protect themselves by assuming that every year will be like the very rainy 2012.

Many people think that a solar panel needs sunshine. All that is required is light. Sun provides more light on a clear day, solar panels are far more efficient at low temperatures than at higher temperature. So, counter-intuitively - a bright blue sky on a freezing November day could produce more energy than a bright blue sky in June! As I write on this cloudy day I am getting more power than my proposed system can handle (there would simply be a dump of the excess power). To protect their guarantee the salesman quote for the worst scene scenario. A dull rainy year in 20 years time with a couple of failed panels. Failed panels are a vital topic but this post is already long enough. Just go for dual micro inverters. If anyone asks I will explain. What all this means is that a system will FAR outperform the figures given by a salesman.

Edited by whtara
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The ones near me are council houses, build by a private builder for the council, the tenants are council tenants but don't pay subsidised rent, the rents are full market value.

 

It's hard to call the rent, in particular council and social housing rents 'subsidised in South Yorks'. The subsidy ends up in the hands of landlords, and ironically council rents have overtaken private rents in quite a few parts due to government mandated above inflation rent rises every year for a decade!

The subsidy is merely one the government pays to itself. It is more of a tax/tax-benefit that is used to boost GDP on the sly and increase housing costs for workers/savers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's hard to call the rent, in particular council and social housing rents 'subsidised in South Yorks'. The subsidy ends up in the hands of landlords, and ironically council rents have overtaken private rents in quite a few parts due to government mandated above inflation rent rises every year for a decade!

The subsidy is merely one the government pays to itself. It is more of a tax/tax-benefit that is used to boost GDP on the sly and increase housing costs for workers/savers.

 

It's a bloody sight harder not to if you can't get a council house and you're paying £600 a month rent on a 3-bedroomed house where the only insulation is the bits of plastic on the wiring.

 

Rents are high in Sheffield - but standards are low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a bloody sight harder not to if you can't get a council house and you're paying £600 a month rent on a 3-bedroomed house where the only insulation is the bits of plastic on the wiring.

 

Rents are high in Sheffield - but standards are low.

 

To be fair, housing benefit for private landlords in the form of LHA will already pay in excess of £600pcm for a 3bed HMO. And with SCC demolishing lots of council housing, that's why you have demand for people to share.

 

When they start evicting people for bedroom tax, they'll start touting the ideas of CHMOs!

 

Council houses of multiple occupancy. We can all live in tiny bedrooms and claim housing benefit for the privilege of doing so!

 

South Yorkshire council house - could claim £200/week in benefits in a few short years easy. With wages remaining below £6.50 an hour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, housing benefit for private landlords in the form of LHA will already pay in excess of £600pcm for a 3bed HMO. And with SCC demolishing lots of council housing, that's why you have demand for people to share.

 

When they start evicting people for bedroom tax, they'll start touting the ideas of CHMOs!

 

Council houses of multiple occupancy. We can all live in tiny bedrooms and claim housing benefit for the privilege of doing so!

 

South Yorkshire council house - could claim £200/week in benefits in a few short years easy. With wages remaining below £6.50 an hour.

dont get me wrong chem but whats this got to do with housing :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.