Are you sure its 43.3p? DECC say otherwise

[SolarCity]

As far as I can see, whenever the supreme court ruling is head, we should have 6 weeks of 43.3p anyway.

If not, do solar firms not have a case to claim against the government for loss of earnings?

 

[mdovey]

If not, do solar firms not have a case to claim against the government for loss of earnings?

If the supreme court appeals fails, then an argument could be made that DECC's continued threat of (by then clearly illegal) retrospective legislation artificially depressed the market between 12/12 and 3/3 - it could be an interesting class action to watch!

 

[SRE]

I should qualify that I'm not condoning selling at 43p (certainly not without a big disclaimer to make sure that the customer is aware of the risk this may drop), just highlighting what a mess DECC has made (not that it needs highlighting). Although for DECC to advise anyone not to sell at 43p is flying close to contempt of court.

I suppose a way of viewing it might be

Installations before 12/12: FIT of 43p guaranteed to remain 43p (adjusted for inflation) for 25 years
Installations between 12/12 and 3/3: FIT of 43p, but not guaranteed to remain 43p (adjusted for inflation) for 25 years, but may drop to 21p (adjusted for inflatation)
Installations after 3/3: FIT of 21p guaranteed to remain 43p (adjusted for inflation) for 25 years

I like and accept your logic but couldn't in all conscience sell at 43p even with a disclaimer.

I suspect the legal argument if you did this would be around the fact that the government clearly indicated that there would be an appeal and regardless of whether this would be successful there is a chance that the Fit could be reduced to 21p.

I guess some of the nationals with legal clout have got their disclaimers sorted out but for the little guys I think it leaves us morally bankrupt and potentially legally liable in the unlikely situation that the government wins the appeal.

To be honest - I think the government have outsmarted the industry. None of my customers are buying at 43p in fact since Wednesday it's actually been more difficult to sell because of the confusion. How on earth do you explain that it's 43p now, could be 21p later but you won't know until you've committed yourself and had the installation done which rate it will be. I sound like a cowboy installer :cuss:

 

[TedM]

Whilst DECC have announced an intention to change the FIT, Parliament needs to pass an ammendment to the "Standard Conditions of Electricity Supply Licenses" before any change is legally enacted. Until then the FIT is legally 43p. At present, parliament has not passed any such change.

DECC are planning to put a proposal to parliament changing the FIT for installations after the 3/3 however this has not yet been passed by parliament. Even when this is passed by parliament, legally the FIT for installations before the 3/3 will remain 43p.

Actually what happens is that once the draft of changes to the Lincese are submitted to Parliament by DECC both the House of Commons and the House of Lords have 40 days in which to reject the proposal. If they don't do this then Huhne can go ahead. There is no requirement for them to expressly vote to approve the changes.

 

[moggy1968]

How do people think they will get 10% of the installation price back from a company that won't even be in existance when the appeal is finally held? They will have shut their doors and moved to thei villa well before then.

 

[deeyup]

I had an email this morning from a solar pv agent guaranteeing 43p for the next 25 years.
http://www.solarpvpanelsonline.co.uk/

 

[dansk]

How? Out of there own pocket?

 

[bigring]

I had an email this morning from a solar pv agent guaranteeing 43p for the next 25 years.http://www.solarpvpanelsonline.co.uk/

There's an advert on the login in page, stating "get the 43p tariff before the tariff change " ????????.

 

[trevor79]

As I see it I can find no legal basis of the FIT rate not being 43.3p up to the 3rd March.
In fact four high court judges have upheld this.

Also it is speculation that DECC will ASK the Supreme Court of leave to appeal, just because they say they will doesn't mean they will do it!

 

[sambotc]

That's true, I wouldn't be surprised if it is dropped after the 3rd march, maybe just a stalling tactic that hasn't worked? I suppose they can way up the costs once all the installs are in and registered, and decide whether or not it is worth taking it to the supreme court?

 

[moggy1968]

I don't think it matters what the logic of it is. Huhne and Barking are using tax payers money to shore up their own saggy egos. They just can't accept they're wrong.

 

[finchy]

The way I see it is it's 21p but customers who have installations before 3/3 have a Chance of 43p, that's what I will say but obviously say the contract is 21p, and they should only sign based on the 21p. !

 

[dansk]

The way I see it is it's 21p but customers who have installations before 3/3 have a Chance of 43p, that's what I will say but obviously say the contract is 21p, and they should only sign based on the 21p. !

And thats what ive sold a few systems on this week.

 

[Gavin A]

And thats what ive sold a few systems on this week.

us too.

We're getting close to being booked solid for Feb having done none at all in January until tomorrow.

 

[dansk]

You know were i am for the over spill ;-)

 

[TMGL]

Although I agree that it is partly a stalling tactic to minimise installs pre March 3rd, I also think that DECC are desperate to ultimately try and win the case as otherwise they will be crucified by class actions...from installers and consumers alike. Just hope the settlements don't come out of the FiT budget!

 

[grandfortune]

i saw in the paper the Dragons den lot,forgot the company are advertising 43p, is it ploughcroft.?, paper was the mail (dad's not mine lol)

 

[dansk]

Yep and online, in fact i noticied two or three Google Adwords displaying 43p, no wonder the customers are confused.

 

[Gavin A]

odd that they're still using 21p in their example calcs on their website then.

 

[GaryM]

i saw in the paper the Dragons den lot,forgot the company are advertising 43p, is it ploughcroft.?, paper was the mail (dad's not mine lol)

Yeah, Ploughcroft. One of their salesmen told me about the advert in the Daily Mail.
I know nothing is concrete but realistically can you see the tariff ending up at anything other than 43.3p currently when the dust finally settles?

 

[moggy1968]

70/30 in favour of 43.3p IMHO

 

[SolarCity]

Lots of adverts are promoting 43.3p.

We've had a lot more interest over the last few days but we've been telling everyone that it is 21p - and 43.3p if we're lucky.

It's a gamble and customers have to assume that 21p is the rate and consider if they think this is value for money.

 

[trevor79]

The law is the law, and the rate is 43.3p until it can be legally changed.
That date being the 3rd March 2012, unless the Government can

a) Be granted leave to appeal by the Supreme court, for which they will have to deliver legal foundations for consideration on the rullings made from the Appeal court.

b) On hearing have landmark judgement made in their favour that they are granted the legal powers to legislate retrospectively.


The odds on that are?????

 

[dansk]

Do we have this in writing anywere? from DECC? or REA? Because this thread is going backwards and forwards from one post to another so much i dont know what to believe.

 

[trevor79]

Yes, read the Appeal court judges published findings, it's there in black and white.
DECC can only issue guidence which is only founded if judgement is eventually overturned in there favour. To enforce that guidence retrospectively would be an illegal act as things stand.

Mind you Huhme is already in hot water on his driving licence/points!

The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in the UK for civil cases, it only hears cases on ARGUABLE points of law.