Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would rather own the solar system. In fact, I do own a solar system that I had installed on my roof.
Now thinking about selling my house but have 6 years on a state credit that should pay me $5K/yr based on production. So I´m not sure someone would be willing to pay for the value of that credit, I would be willing to something less based on future income is not the same as current and some risk factor.
So here´s a question, how much would you pay for a future credit as mentioned above if it´s probably 90% certian that you will get the full $30K over the next 6 years?
Well - can't speak for anyone else, but in a case like you've outlined - as a buyer, I'd pay out at a similar rate to those "JG Wentworth" guys who run ads during "Jerry Springer"..
lol "it's *my* money, and I need it NOW!"..
sure thing!
how's $.20 on the dollar sound?
Warranties are only as good as the company behind them - and in Az the desert is piled high with the corpses of failed solar companies. A $5k tax credit sounds just delicious, but if there's a very real possibility that I might get nailed hard for a proprietary inverter / controller or other hi-tech / hi-buck doodad over the next five-ten years, I'd rather leave my money in the bank.
A "used" solar system just doesn't add much current cash-value to a house imho, even if it's a smoking deal.
The other problem with solar leases when purchasing on an existing home is the fact that you must qualify for that lease payment and it could affect your debt ratio's. Dealing with this exact situation for a buyer right now.
Best advise I can give is take the lease and get some legal advice so you know how to structure an offer on the home. The sellers I am dealing with are not willing to buy out the lease, so my buyer is also going to have to move on.
There is a house we really like, nice 'hood, great layout but it has a solar lease which is giving me pause. What would YOU do? TIA!
Depends on what the payments are. Do you have any details on the lease....how big the system is, what the monthly payments are. Some of the leases can be bought out, some cannot, it just depends.
Some people got absolute bargains on their leases a few years ago, I'm talking $90 a month to offset about $200 a month worth of electricity. You'd be foolish not to take that. There's a lot of homeowners who got leases from 2011 to late 2012 who ended up with ridiculously favorable terms. That would be worth looking into.
But then you've got those who signed up for leases where they pay $120 a month that at best offsets $125 to 130 a month at current utility rates. At that range I would be far less likely to take that lease.
MOST IMPORTANT*******-Check if the lease has an escalator, that is, it goes up by a certain percentage each year. A lot of the people who got in on some early leases from the nationwide companies, SolarCity....SunRun...etc, got stuck with 2.9% to 3.9% escalators, avoid those like the plague.
But I bet you wouldn't want to buy a computer today and sign a lease that you're committed to it for 20 years. Or at the very least be at the whim of the contract for that computer that they, not you, make the decision when you will get a new computer or not.
Apples to orange comparison. Nobody leases computers for 20 years. By your reasoning, nobody should install solar panels because they will eventually be outdated. And by that reasoning, nobody should ever buy technology because there's always something new coming out. Solar panels built today can last up to 30 years. That means after the loan is paid off, the homeowner has dramatically lower utility bills and has only paid part of the cost to install them.
The real reason people on this board are against buying a house with solar panels is because somebody else bought them and agreed to terms over which you would lack control. The Arizona ethos dislikes anything to sharing and community, and the real reason most of you are against this is because you don't want what you perceive to be somebody's leftovers.
But in truth, contracts are contracts, and if this is a standard agreement, I don't see why there should be any red flags. Just make sure the price is good and the terms reasonable.
Also, solar technology really isn't that new. It's been around a while and they're even getting to the point where some solar panels can store energy after dark. A lot of recent news reports have talked about how much solar is growing because panels are finally getting affordable and that affordability is spurring even more adoption.
The real reason people on this board are against buying a house with solar panels is because somebody else bought them and agreed to terms over which you would lack control. The Arizona ethos dislikes anything to sharing and community, and the real reason most of you are against this is because you don't want what you perceive to be somebody's leftovers.
But in truth, contracts are contracts, and if this is a standard agreement, I don't see why there should be any red flags. Just make sure the price is good and the terms reasonable.
Forgetting the reasons why people don't want a leased solar system, it seems as though it factually has reduced the buying pool. Hence, I wouldn't want a home with a leased solar system because it is going to hurt resale. Perception is reality. I'd strongly contemplate solar but I am not taking over anyone's "payments" or forced obligations. I'm waiting for the next paradigm shift in technology and I will jump on board. Not with a lease but with a purchase.
Apples to orange comparison. Nobody leases computers for 20 years. By your reasoning, nobody should install solar panels because they will eventually be outdated. And by that reasoning, nobody should ever buy technology because there's always something new coming out. Solar panels built today can last up to 30 years. That means after the loan is paid off, the homeowner has dramatically lower utility bills and has only paid part of the cost to install them.
The real reason people on this board are against buying a house with solar panels is because somebody else bought them and agreed to terms over which you would lack control. The Arizona ethos dislikes anything to sharing and community, and the real reason most of you are against this is because you don't want what you perceive to be somebody's leftovers.
But in truth, contracts are contracts, and if this is a standard agreement, I don't see why there should be any red flags. Just make sure the price is good and the terms reasonable.
Also, solar technology really isn't that new. It's been around a while and they're even getting to the point where some solar panels can store energy after dark. A lot of recent news reports have talked about how much solar is growing because panels are finally getting affordable and that affordability is spurring even more adoption.
I think the difference is that everyone has electric bills, no matter what, and that isn't changing. If someone got into a favorable solar lease, I wouldn't have any qualms about taking it over if I know that my payments will stay the same and I will see a decent amount of savings from the very first day.
Honestly, what difference does it make to me who I am paying for my electricity. There's no merit in paying APS $200 a month as opposed to paying a leasing company $100 a month and APS $50 or so. I'd still be $600 a year better off and at least I know that the lease won't ever increase..unlike APS.
But it all depends on the terms. A lease with minimal savings, an escalator or some other objectionable stipulations would be one to stay away from.
Apples to orange comparison. Nobody leases computers for 20 years. By your reasoning, nobody should install solar panels because they will eventually be outdated. And by that reasoning, nobody should ever buy technology because there's always something new coming out. Solar panels built today can last up to 30 years.
You missed the entire point of my comparison and that's if one LOCKS into a technology, via a legal agreement for 20 years, it is indeed an issue in my book. If 15 years from now one can buy solar panels that are as thin as a garbage bag and a fraction of the size of a current installed solar panel system footprint, are far cheaper, no monthly fee has to be paid to a leasing company because the person bought the system on their own, and the system generates far more power than current system(it's all in the pipeline) and the leaser who is in control of the lease doesn't upgrade the panels, that's a dodo bird for one who is buying that house ion my book. And yes, no one locks into a computer lease for 20 years for good reason so why lock into a solar lease for 20 years that will more than likely look like a dinosaur technology wise 10, 15, etc. years from now that the buyer of the lease has no control or say over to switch that technology out and get out of the lease because paying a monthly fee to a leasing company will look silly given how cheap the technology can become within a 20 year lease.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlohaFriday
The real reason people on this board are against buying a house with solar panels is because somebody else bought them and agreed to terms over which you would lack control. The Arizona ethos dislikes anything to sharing and community, and the real reason most of you are against this is because you don't want what you perceive to be somebody's leftovers.
Please.
It's best to perhaps ask someone why they feel in such a way before assuming everyone in a state fits your black and white explanation. In my view, it's all about investment/return and perception when it comes time to sell or buy a home. The all mighty $. Selling/buying a house has enough moving parts for people, it's a stressful thing, and throwing a lease for solar panels to me just complicates matters that I don't want to deal with. Simple as that.
As for buying someone's "leftovers", I love collecting a few old vintage items(vintage instruments, old electronics, etc).
Life is far less black and white than your reasoning indicates in your above statement to throw everyone in the "Arizona ethos" of thinking.
Honestly, what difference does it make to me who I am paying for my electricity. There's no merit in paying APS $200 a month as opposed to paying a leasing company $100 a month and APS $50 or so. I'd still be $600 a year better off and at least I know that the lease won't ever increase..unlike APS.
Unless after 12 years into that lease the average person can buy their own solar system for cheap, with a much smaller footprint, with much higher capacity, and pay zero dollars to a leasing company as the system is your own.
Apples to orange comparison. Nobody leases computers for 20 years. By your reasoning, nobody should install solar panels because they will eventually be outdated. And by that reasoning, nobody should ever buy technology because there's always something new coming out. Solar panels built today can last up to 30 years. That means after the loan is paid off, the homeowner has dramatically lower utility bills and has only paid part of the cost to install them.
The real reason people on this board are against buying a house with solar panels is because somebody else bought them and agreed to terms over which you would lack control. The Arizona ethos dislikes anything to sharing and community, and the real reason most of you are against this is because you don't want what you perceive to be somebody's leftovers.
But in truth, contracts are contracts, and if this is a standard agreement, I don't see why there should be any red flags. Just make sure the price is good and the terms reasonable.
Also, solar technology really isn't that new. It's been around a while and they're even getting to the point where some solar panels can store energy after dark. A lot of recent news reports have talked about how much solar is growing because panels are finally getting affordable and that affordability is spurring even more adoption.
You're a little off on the reasoning, imho - buyers are just plain bad at math. Leases in general are complicated math problems & solar leases have even more moving parts & potential for havoc. If APS gets silly with their rate increases, me and the neighbors can all toddle down to the APS building with our pitchforks. If I take over a lease from "xyz slimey solar co" , and get "zinged" by a contract provision that I didn't notice, it's all on me.
I'm a huge fan of solar & would wholeheartedly endorse code changes that required all new/rehabbed housing in the valley be laid out with rooflines that would work properly with solar.. it's just silly that we don't take advantage of all the free energy we have raining down on us all year.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Or at the very least be at the whim of the contract for that computer that they, not you, make the decision when you will get a new computer or not.
Please.
