Existing Solar Panels on a house?

[16vCento]

My parents have found a lovely house at the coast they like, they want to downsize and retire somewhere quiet and the house looks great, and is in a lovely area, but..

It has solar panels from a company called Shades Greener, and from what I can find it looks like the house is cheap dues to this.

There's loads of complaints about no response from then if you need the panels removing for work being done, unreasonable demands, customer service etcs.

Anyone have any experience of this?

I said run a mile, I wouldn't buy it, looked like they have a leasehold on the roof from the .gov website which sounds dodgy as fuck to me.

[Zonda_]

Eh? The company that installs the panels doesn't own them. We've changed companies a couple of times.

[dinny_g]

Yeah run a mile…

5 mins of Googling confirms this.

[Mito Man]

Eh? The company that installs the panels doesn't own them. We've changed companies a couple of times.

I do recall a dodgy scene back then where companies would lease your roof to install solar panels, then you get a cheaper electricity tariff and they also profit from it - something along those lines.
It did cause some problems with getting a mortgage and repairs etc.

[Carlos]

I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand but the terms of the agreement should be available from the vendor or agent.

[16vCento]

Eh? The company that installs the panels doesn't own them. We've changed companies a couple of times.

They certainly do for these ones!

I can't see any good outcome from this, so unless there's granite proof it ok, they need to leave it.

[16vCento]

I've told them to get the full contract from the seller, the house was the seller's parents who are deceased, probate cleared now etcs, but the roof situation seems very odd.

It's even listed as two addresses on the .gov site, one for the house, and one for the air space above it!

[Jobbo]

Plenty of early solar panel providers took a lease of your roof and airspace. Basically that means part of your house is not yours; it’s been given over to a company for them to make money.

Not a great thing, particularly if you need to re-roof or to do a loft conversion, for instance.

[16vCento]

Yep that seems to be the case.

It started in 2014 and goes to 2039, they plan on living there the rest of their lives, and my mum is 58, so we're a bit concerned about what would happen after the lease is up, or if the company go bust.

From what I can gather, if the panels needed to come off for roof repairs, you have to pay £1000 just for them to come out and take them off

[Gavster]

Who is the freeholder? I assume it the house owner who granted the lease to the solar people? And what happens when the lease expires? Do they have some weird right to extend it?

I'd be doing lots of research and then considering how low-ball my offer would need to be, to compensate for potential headaches in the future. Sounds like it could be a real bargain if they plan to live out the lease on the roof.

[16vCento]

It lists a freehold for the house, a freehold and lease hold for the airspace above it?

I don't think they will move again, they certainly don't plan to, they have been where they are for 31 years, but you never know what might happen, and although they won't have any issues as they won't have a mortgage, if whoever buys it next needs a mortgage it could cause a headache.

I've told them to get all the documents from the sellers, it's a lovely house, but not worth it if it will cause problems.

[dinny_g]

It all comes down to a pretty hard nosed decision.

If they're in their 70's or 80's and there's 20+ years left on the panel lease then I'd say no. However If they're in their 60's and there's 5 or 10 years to go (and the lease exit is clean) then it's a different decision.

It's hard to think in those terms but I think they have to. I'm sure they don't want to leave a mess for their kids to sort our when the eventual time comes>

@Jobbo - is there a Probate Capital Gains concern here - HMRC value the property at "market value" but the true value (in terms of what people are prepared to pay) is less due to the lease situation?

[Sundayjumper]

Who is the freeholder? I assume it the house owner who granted the lease to the solar people? And what happens when the lease expires? Do they have some weird right to extend it?

I'd be doing lots of research and then considering how low-ball my offer would need to be, to compensate for potential headaches in the future. Sounds like it could be a real bargain if they plan to live out the lease on the roof.

I agree with Gavster. With some negotiating it could be a bargain.

Or alternatively, I disagree with Gavster. As a retirement property you want minimal hassle and this is not that.

[Sundayjumper]

It lists a freehold for the house, a freehold and lease hold for the airspace above it?

Ownership of the freehold of the air space seems to be the key point here.

[Gavster]

It lists a freehold for the house, a freehold and lease hold for the airspace above it?

I don't think they will move again, they certainly don't plan to, they have been where they are for 31 years, but you never know what might happen, and although they won't have any issues as they won't have a mortgage, if whoever buys it next needs a mortgage it could cause a headache.

I've told them to get all the documents from the sellers, it's a lovely house, but not worth it if it will cause problems.

You're right that it would cause a massive headache for anyone that needed to finance the purchase. I had a very similar situation before and it caused chaos getting a mortgage. We were buying a freehold flat that occupied the lower two floors of the building, and there was a lease granted on the flat above us. Created a huge amount of problems. At one point it looked like we would need the vendor to create a lease for our flat, so that we could buy it leasehold, and then also buy the freehold. On that basis a cash buyer has a huge amount of leverage to negotiate.

The chances of needing to work on the roof are once a decade, so in reality, it's not going to cause that many issues, although worth getting a good survey. If there is a very clear and definitive way to remove that lease upon expiry then it's not exactly a massive problem. On the other hand, if the solar people have some rights, which lessees usually do, especially when it comes to extending leases etc, then I'd steer clear. I can recommend an excellent landlord and tenant solicitor if you want advice, although am unsure if these solar panel leases is an area of expertise. I can ask if you want?

[16vCento]

I've been on the phone to my mum for the last half hour and they're going to leave it, too much hassle.

They want an easy move, I'd guess it's stressful enough moving 30 years of stuff without added complexities.

Thanks for advice all, if I was looking I'd probably go for it, as it's a lovely house, and cheap, but if they need to sell it looks a nightmare.

They're coming over to mine this afternoon to go through some other houses and I'll go through Saturday with my Dad to have a proper look.

[IanF]

If the house is good value, why not speak to Shades Greener about removing the solar panels (or buying them off them) May still be a fair price

[16vCento]

They don't allow buy outs of the panels, which seems an odd business model.

You can pay something daft like 15k for an early termination, but that seems daft if your getting cheaper electric.

The big issue seems to be mortgages, and pigeons nesting.

I'd be tempted to just go for it, but they are very risk averse, and I don't really blame them, i might go look at it on Saturday and buy it myself though

[Gavster]

These kinds of property issues can take up an awful amount of headspace over a prolonged period of time, even if it's (in theory) straightforward. I can fully understand not wanting to take it on!

[Simon]

Either what Ian says or run a mile. Sod not 'owning' your own roof etc. What a ballache and what idiots sign up to things in the first place?