government sponsored green con ??

[seasidegirl]

Maybe I've mis-understood the aspect of a 'charge' on the property. We've always had charges on properties we've owned (or been buying) and that was the mortgage. When we sold and moved the solicitor paid the charge on the property out of the proceeds.

Can't see why the charge should remain on the house when sold and therefore why anyone would have to buy a house with a charge.

[Big Al]

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 ??

I think you may have wrote your post whilst angry but something certainly wasn't right Brett

To take each of your points here is an alternative view.

1. It is not a charge on the house in the same way that a charge is applied for the likes of debt or mortgage. A charge in the instance of debt means that you do not pay anything off the debt and you actually incure interest on the debt at a given rate of 8% per annum compound. This type of charge and the form of a mortgage are paid off when the house is sold but this is preventing people from doing this as it is too costly when people on average move every 12 years. This energy proposal is going to be on the house for the duration of a decreasing loan. In other words you borrow say £10,000 for eco works and over say 25 years you will pay back this £10k [ and a bit of intrest] in your monthly energy bill. This will equate to around £38 per month [without interest which is estiated will be around 2.3%]. You will save more than £38 per month on your fuel bill so you will have a warmer house and the government can reduce the greenhouse emmissions.

2. see number 1

3. The only way a householder will be able to default will be to not pay for the energy they use.

4. External insulation is more likely to be "internal insulation " by the addition of the kingspan type drywall foam and then plaster board over that. This would in the most negate planning applications and listed buildings would probably nor be eligeble.

5. If you read the document it states that all the eligble work would be done by 2030. The work starts with mandatory [ via energy companies] loft / cavity wall insulation in 2011 and from 2013 theeco revamps would start.

6. All new builds have to be built to code 3 level as a minimum which does include all of the proposed cavity wall / loft insulation / water harvesting et al. Codes 4,5 and 6 is where people like me would build a new house. In fact I would have code 6 as a minimum personally but when this was proposed the builders did object as it would cost an extra £10k on a £150k house!!

7. I'll put this one down to a rant as it is answered above...

8. The vast majority of people are relativly honest or law abiding. If someone trys to do a bunk then I'm sure the powers that be will find out.

9. Interest is proposed to be around 2.3% and fixed.

10. As for this point ...

oh and this bit

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

don't put yourself down even if it is true...

If people are wanting to embrace this then it is up to them to research the best product for them. As for companies coming and going how many companies have failed due to banks that were previously good businesses or industries that have collapsed due to it being cheaper to import. Coalmining, shipbuilding and clothing spring to mind.

Big Al.

[contadino]

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.

I must confess to not understanding this. I've read it several times from several sources, and I've watched that Money is Debt film and it still doesn't make sense.

If you look at the spread of debt, household debt (whilst still being far too high) pales into insignificance compared to corporate and speculative debt. I'm sure that if everyone paid off their debt the economy would shrink at a rate that would screw things up dramatically, but how would it make the money in your wallet worthless? Worth less, sure, but worthless?

If you look at the size of credit default swap and other derivative markets around Europe, household debts really are little more than a drop in the ocean.

Apologies for veering off topic.

[brett53]

thanks for your opinion big al - i will as always allow you all to judge the validity of my opinions and agree or not as you see fit

however your last comment ( re the dumb schmuck ) is insulting - and i don't stay on sites where i get insulted - so this will be my last post here

goodbye and good luck to you all

i will take my brand of realism else where - as it obviously not welcome here

FAREWELL !!

[Big Al]

thanks for your opinion big al - i will as always allow you all to judge the validity of my opinions and agree or not as you see fit

however your last comment ( re the dumb schmuck ) is insulting - and i don't stay on sites where i get insulted - so this will be my last post here

goodbye and good luck to you all

i will take my brand of realism else where - as it obviously not welcome here

FAREWELL !!

You called yourself a dumb smuck Brett, I just agreed all be it rather tounge in cheek but fine, I 'm not one to grovel and ask forgivness to keep you on this site because you feel insulted. If I'm out of order then the mods will tell me so.

If you had read the documents that you linked to before your post you would have found the answers to your post questions.

Take care,

Big Al.

[Millymollymandy]

OK Mod Hat on for a moment.

Brett - calm down, there's nothing insulting in Big Al's post, at least not the way I read it. He did start it with a laughing smiley so that's an indication it isn't serious (unless point 10 was something else, I can't read that now as there's too much there to scroll back to).

But Big Al is a tongue in cheek person and he certainly doesn't go round insulting people on purpose. Though I suppose if point 10 was nothing to do with the dumb schmuck comment then a smiley would have been better to indicate it was tongue in cheek, Big Al (especially with people who haven't been around for ages and don't know you very well.)

Don't be silly, come back and carry on with your rants as I rather enjoy them.

[Big Al]

Point 10 was about politicens trying to be politically correct, touchy feely, listening to the good people of the country......... in the run up to an election which labour might not win and thus they would not have to put these plans into action.