Is the REAL Assurance Scheme really a useless waste of money for customers?

[sedgy34]

Having read other posts about peoples’ opinion of REAL, here is the experience of a customer.

After trying unsuccessfully for over a month to get the installer to come and investigate issues with our PV installation, I finally resorted to the comfort and assurance we, as customers, are apparently given by MCS certification and REAL membership when buying a system and the REAL Assurance Scheme Insurance Backed Guarantee we purchase to protect ourselves after the installation.

6th Feb contact both MCS and REAL regarding issue via their websites.

9th Feb, reply from MCS, who pass the onus on to the Certification Body (Benchmark in this case) ‘who have the power to remove the installer's MCS certification’ and suggest I contact them. (don't MCS have the power to remove their certification??)

8th March - response from REAL saying they are looking in to the issue.

16th March - reply from REAL saying that they have been unable to contact the installer who has now had its MCS certification and REAL membership withdrawn. No suggestions on how to proceed, so I reply, pursuing the issue.

19th march - reply from REAL suggesting that I contact Benchmark! who could suggest an electrician I could pay to come out and investigate.

2nd April - Contact Benchmark who say that their powers only extend to suspending an installer's MCS certification and that I need to contact REAL. Pass this information back to REAL.

26th April - no response from REAL. Contact QANW who provide the insurance for the assurance(!) who refuse to send me a claim form unless I can prove that the installer has ceased trading - and that I need to contact REAL for them to tell QANW that the installer has ceased trading. If they don't have MCS or REAL membership then how can they trade? No, they have to be struck off the Companies house register - but they're not listed at Companies House - ah, but the parent company is and that's showing as still active.

So I call REAL and speak to someone (yes, really, after several attempts and waiting an age someone did eventually answer the phone). One of the comments they make is that 'it's difficult when a company ceases trading' - er, isn't that part of the raison d'etre of the REAL Assurance scheme? on their website it states:
"The scheme will also protect the written workmanship guarantee that they provide you with once the installation is complete, just in case they cease to trade while the guarantee is still valid."

26th April - Response from REAL saying that they have spoken with QANW and that they will be sending me a claim form.

11th May - nothing heard or received from QANW so give REAL a nudge.

16th May - Claim form arrives from QANW which includes the question 'Has the defect occurred within the last 30 days?' and further on a reminder 'Remember, this is a defect that has occurred within the last 30 days'
If a defect becomes apparent and the installer has ceased to trade then the administrator for the insurance must be advised within 30 days.

So, you can't claim if the installer (or parent company) is still trading (even if not in PV installations) and they will probably wriggle out of accepting the claim if you haven't advised them within 30 days of the defect occurring that the installer has ceased to trade, even if they themselves can't find out, or in this case won't find out for themselves but need somebody else to tell them!

Seems to me as a customer that the safety net and assurance we are given is full of very large holes for us to fall through, that MCS, REAL the ccertification body and insurer pass the buck to each other (sometimes in circles!) and the end provider of the insurance is happily taking £35 a time off of thousands of misled customers for a policy that they are very unlikely to pay out on.

Can you contact who the installer is registered with to make complaint ie, napit niceic they should pursue it on your behalf