government sponsored green con ??

[brett53]

that ed milliwatsit - you know the minister for Eco/ climate change / they did not know where else to put him ,fella with the latest great "green con "on the telly this morning - basically it gos like this :

cant afford to install solar heating /insulation/double glazing ?? /solar panels /a windmill - noooooooooo problem ,if we change the law then companies will fit it for you with no up front charges - and recoup it by putting a"charge" on the property ( repayable through your energy bill over 25 years or so ) - now note this - A CHARGE ON THE PROPERTY - NOT THE INDIVIDUAL - sooooo i theory you could have all the whizz bangs fitted - then sell the house and leave the next owner with the debt ( why cant i think of scams like that ?? )

well when pushed - ed watsitface reckoned this would not be a problem as one would save more by having all this stuff than it would cost in the long run -plus of course it would make the house more attractive to any potential buyer AND apparently companies are queuing up to take part -OH I BET THEY ARE !!

one issue skirted round with the ease of a well practiced politico ,was of course the question of interest on the money that these firms would have to put up

so basing this on rule of thumb - in that if you have 3000 quids worth of double glazing ( and end up paying back 8000+ odd according to one advert i saw if you have it on tick ) - basically you will over 25 years pay LOADSA MONEY

i am just waiting for the sales people to come round trying to convince me this is a good idea - oh they will - the last lot said "oh but we will give you up to 100 pounds per window for those old aly ones - er put the cost on the top of the bill more like

do they REALLY think we are ALL that stupid ??

so beware this one folks - there is and never WILL be such a thing as a free lunch !! - green /eco / climate change or otherwise

[Thomzo]

I haven't seen the details yet but I can see where they are coming from. I have renovated loads of properties but, if you're going to sell on, there's no point putting in all the eco stuff as you won't benefit from the payback. Also, it doesn't substantially add to the value of the property so most developers don't bother.

In this instance the developer won't actually pay the cost, the new owner will, so there is more incentive for the developer to put it in at the renovation stage.

Having said that, of course, I bet potential buyers will use the future repayments as a reason to reduce their offer in the first place.

Also, most people stretch themselves to the limit when they buy a new house, so I worry about them then having to take on another loan.

I bet most of these loans will get paid off when the house changes hands out of the sales proceeds.

Zoe

[Green Aura]

It seems very expensive though. If you buy a £4k solar panel you repay it at £328 over 25 years. that's £82K, according to Channel 4 news.

Aren't this government the ones who want to outlaw loan sharks with exhorbitant interest rates. Over 100% strikes me as just that.

[crowsashes]

It seems very expensive though. If you buy a £4k solar panel you repay it at £328 over 25 years. that's £82K, according to Channel 4 news.

Aren't this government the ones who want to outlaw loan sharks with exhorbitant interest rates. Over 100% strikes me as just that.

id rather give up a holiday ( if i ever had one ) than get that kind of a loan!! it makes certain doorstop lenders look almost angelic! and what happens if the product doesnt last 25 years?

most items have a warranty of 2 years some have a 10 year guarantee if you cant pay for it before the warranty is up it aint worth it!

[Thomzo]

It seems very expensive though. If you buy a £4k solar panel you repay it at £328 over 25 years. that's £82K, according to Channel 4 news.

Aren't this government the ones who want to outlaw loan sharks with exhorbitant interest rates. Over 100% strikes me as just that.

Erm, I think Channel 4 have got themselves in a muddle. According to the articles I've seen, that is the saving in fuel cost per annum (not per month) from installing the various bits and pieces not the repayment amount.

Zoe

[brett53]

details here : http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... s-go-green

er here http://www.decc.gov.uk/

more here http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/p ... _plan.aspx

however all this - seems to ignore some fundamental points :

1.willingness of people to HAVE charges on their homes

2 ability to pay back said loan - I like many others may own a house - but am not in a position to have any MORE payments to make each month as finances are finite ( vis MR ED - we ain't all on politico or "London " wages )

3 . what happens if someone has all this stuff fitted and then defaults ?? - do the companies who put it in then have a right to grab the property to get their money back ??

4. some houses - like mine would require extensive external insulation to bring them up to spec - will the planning laws be relaxed to allow this and what of any listed buildings ??

5 .there seems to be no sense of urgency with this - talk of by 2030 etc - well i could be dead then - surly it would be far better to make ANY Eco / insulation product ZERO VAT RATED - oh sorry i forgot the chancellor would loose out - so that ain't gonna happen

6 . if all this is like soooooooo important - then why don't they pass a law requiring it to all be fitted in ANY new development ?? - from NOW not 2030 or whenever - why - because the house building lobby would resist

7. people just ain't interested in all this stuff - they have other priorities - like the latest 73 inch TV - or that new car - or next years holiday to some exotic place or in some cases heating and eating to survive - this is typical "London " thinking - Mr ed and his ilk seem to think we are ALL on big wages - we hear all this BS about the "average " national wage - well Edward - FYI there's a LOT of us poor eeks out here that can only DREAM of even approaching this mythical figure - and our priorities lie else where than hocking ourselves up with debt to comply with your "vision" of a green utopia

8. and what of our friendly product suppliers ?? - don't you think they are going to be looking VERY carefully at the cash worthiness of any potential loaner ? - do you REALLY think they are going to fit 1000' of pounds of gear on the strength of a charge on property ,when its a fact that there are equally unscrupulous people out here that could have a sub standard property uprated - then strip it all out and do a bunk ?? - i am thinking about some landlords - and certain property "owners" who shall we say don't play by "English " rules - and the gear would probably end up in a container to a 3 world area for their relatives to benefit from - happens folks - no good shutting your eyes to the fact - i have seen houses totally stripped of ALL fittings - pipework etc - then torched to cover up the fact

9. and will the "interest charges " be fixed or variable ?? - the suppliers ain't gonna loose money from "their" investment that's for sure - and i wonder how many fly by night firms will start up on the back of this one ??

10 . does any one suspect this is juts more hot "green" air - because there's an election in the offing and Mr ed knows he may not have to deliver on any of it ??

and if a dumb smuck like me can see all this - how come our "clever" politicos and advisers cant ??

[Green Aura]

That should have read £8.2K! Maybe I misunderstood, but I'm sure they said that £328 annually for 25 years was the repayment figure. I certainly hope I'm wrong.

[TheGoodEarth]

I think it is a win win situation, it won't cost the homeowner any money as the saving in energy bills will cover the annual repayment. The environment benefits from C02 savings. The economy benefits from extra jobs. The finance firms make their cut through the interest charge. Everyone in the process benefits.

WRT the charge against the property I can't see any problem with this either. It should be treated just like the council tax and be accepted as a charge you should expect when buying. Remember although you may pay £400pa you will save this amount on your bills so it won't really cost you anything.

The only potential problem I see is when it comes to replacing worn or dated technology in say 10 years time. There will be a capital cost invloved but you may not see the same level of savings on your bills as you will not be increasing your generation capacity, just replacing it.

[MKG]

Let's face it - the ONLY reason this is being done is so that the government can be seen to be attempting to meet their carbon commitments. Heaven forbid that they should do this the easy way and tackle industrial output and the Great God CAR. No, as usual, the private individual will end up paying. There's nothing wrong with the principle (everyone SHOULD do it), but it's just a tad hypocritical on our leaders' parts.

What a horrible image - our leaders' parts

Mike

[contadino]

Let's face it - the ONLY reason this is being done is so that the government can be seen to be attempting to meet their carbon commitments. Heaven forbid that they should do this the easy way and tackle industrial output and the Great God CAR. No, as usual, the private individual will end up paying. There's nothing wrong with the principle (everyone SHOULD do it), but it's just a tad hypocritical on our leaders' parts.

Errr...no. The reason this (and the FIT scheme, car scrapage, boiler scrapage, etc..) are being presented now is because every other industry sector is at a standstill. People aren't taking on any more debt and the economy is dependent on debt. The only way for any economic growth is for politicians to come up with more bizarre ways to burden people with debt.

[seasidegirl]

When I first heard about this scheme I thought it sounded just right for us. Our house is very inefficient because we have an old boiler, no cavity wall and a poor radiator system. The boiler scrappage scheme is no good because £400 off isn't much help if you haven't got the rest of the money to buy a boiler. We can't get any credit through any other source so if the govt wants to organise us a loan then fine by me. Obviously I'd look into the interest and consider if the fuel savings would cover it. I'd rather pay a bit to reducing our consumption than pay over the odds to the greedy fuel companies.

I saw one of the opposition politicies being questioned about it and he didn't have a bad thing to say about the scheme and as usually they rubbish anything the govt does I was encouraged.

I agree with the person who said it's good for the economy because it will create work but also it will be yet another thing increasing debt. Actually I think its a debt worth having the way fuel has gone up.

[crowsashes]

Errr...no. The reason this (and the FIT scheme, car scrapage, boiler scrapage, etc..) are being presented now is because every other industry sector is at a standstill. People aren't taking on any more debt and the economy is dependent on debt. The only way for any economic growth is for politicians to come up with more bizarre ways to burden people with debt.

this is exactly the problem we have, every single penny in our wallets is dependant on the debts of someone else. wipe out all debt you effectively wipe out all money.

[Minnesota]

Err...no. The reason this (and the FIT scheme, car scrapage, boiler scrapage, etc..) are being presented now is because every other industry sector is at a standstill. People aren't taking on any more debt and the economy is dependent on debt. The only way for any economic growth is for politicians to come up with more bizarre ways to burden people with debt.

WOW, in Europe too !
this is exactly what I see happening in the USA.
"Cash for Clunkers" (cars, that is..they had to be scrapped too)
now were have "Cash for energy wasting Household appliances",
same thing, they had to be scrapped.
"Cash for Household appliances" lasted one day til the government ran out of cash vouchers.

They are hoping to jump start the ecomony with people buying new items using debt instead of cash. Problem is, the USA doesn't make much of these comsumables any more, yes we still make cars, although most of the parts to build cars are imported. So we are not helping the manufacturing sector of our economy very much.

[seasidegirl]

I don't think this is about jump-starting the economy. Although that would be a useful side effect.

My guess is that although they talk about reducing carbon emissions there is a deeper agenda. I think they have only just realised how vulnerable we are in terms of fuel and food security. They know that there is going to be insufficient power in years to come and while they can't build power stations in time they can reduce consumption and therefore pressure on the grid.

Similarly with food. The bulk of it sold by about four different shops so we rely on the supermarkets like we relied on the banks. Look where that got us. Any number of events could interrupt the food supply chain.

[brett53]

well seems we will all have an opinion on this - mine is this ( if i was in the house buying market ) - that IF i want all this stuff ,then I will get it - not be forced to accept a debt for stuff that may be a heap of proverbial , as again the realist in me says that if this go's ahead ( see my rider about the election in my last ) - there are going to be lots of firms starting up to jump on this latest bandwagon - promising the earth and possibly going skat - well what happens then eh ?? - does the debt get canceled ?? - well the receivers could call it in or even the government take it on ( vis the good ol taxpayer as usual)

and WHAT guarantees of quality will there be ?? - firms could fit a load of cheap tat - the average punter ain't going to know

as to the bit about debt - well THATS what has gotten the economy into the state its in now - none of us NEED debt - i don't have any - and cut my cloth according to my means - vis pay for what i have and if i cant afford it - don't have it - simples eh ?? - but society has this must have - want it all and want it now outlook today - we ALL it seems ( well nearly all ) must have the new telly - the new sofa - the holidays - the cars - like sheep who cant see they are being USED - as cash cows

no folks you DONT need all this stuff - its a mind set that society has adopted - essentials yes - like fridges and cookers etc - the rest are luxury items - and before any of you jump - everything i have EVER owned** has been bought cash money - had ONE loan in my life which once i figured out just HOW much it was costing me became the last - and now would not touch credit with a barge pole - and as for "credit cards " licensed usury nothing less

i take a leaf out of David copperfield when Micawber opined thus :

My other piece of advice, Copperfield, said Mr. Micawber, you know. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.

but to be fair i am a tad unusual in this - each to their own - but IMO - being in debt ain't ISH its stupidish - of course the other argument that will get chucked at me is "well if you had kids - you wouldn't be saying that " - well before any one does - let me tell you that if i HAD kids they would learn like i had to when i was young and wanted things - you cant have all you want - and this BS about them being "deprived" or "underprivileged" just don't wash with me - gives em strength of character and makes em value money - unlike many of the spoilt brats i see today who value nothing - i wanted a bike for my birthday when i was about ten - what i got was a pile of bits from the local tip some new tubes and tires and some wet and dry paper - well once the tears subsided my farther mad me clean and rub down all the parts - paint them and assemble the bike - i asked him many years later WHY when he could have afforded a new one - and he replied " well at least you never threw your bike down like the well off kids " - that has stuck with me always

any ways as i say your life - your choices peeps - and good luck to you - me - at least when i leave this world - i will be able to stick 2 fingers up to every one and say well i payed my way and owed no one anything

** except the house which my late wife and her mum struggled to pay off - bless them - and i Franky would rather her still here and a mortgage round my neck - and so regard my self as only temporary "keeper " of the money pit - rather than "owner"