Catherine Posted April 17, 2015 Report Share Posted April 17, 2015 This may be germane to some of our clients. I know I get these questions (lease or buy) and my response will be substantially different with this new knowledge; will have my clients ask MANY more questions. http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2015/04/17/if-you-install-solar-panels-you-may-have-a-lien-on-your-home/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max W Posted April 17, 2015 Report Share Posted April 17, 2015 From the article - I would love to tell them how they bamboozled me, a Ph.D.,” Leeds said. “Imagine what they can do with the average schmuck out there.” Just goes to show that Ph.D. are not so smart if they can't read the contract and ask the questions about something they don't know or understand. Yes, the company's practice is nefarious, but in CA there is a 3 day right of cancellation, plenty of time to read the contract. In fact, by cancelling the contract, the company will most likely come back and offer an additional discount. UCC filings are common in business and they are definitely liens, albeit specialized liens only against a specific debt and not on the entire property. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcjenkins Posted April 17, 2015 Report Share Posted April 17, 2015 It is almost always better, financially to buy rather than lease, the panels. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Posted April 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2015 I did not like the implication that "only" a PhD holder can be smart (and that if you can put one over on them you're extremely clever in your disguise). However, it is also VERY clear from the article that the leasing company is telling people "this is NOT a lien" when, in fact, it IS considered a lien by banks etc. THAT is deception if not fraud. I don't care *what* people do in terms of getting solar panels: buy, lease, take up a collection, refrain, whatever. As long as they have all the pertinent information to make that decision. Being told "not a lien" when all outside agencies with whom one must deal say "yes, a lien" is deception. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BulldogTom Posted April 18, 2015 Report Share Posted April 18, 2015 A UCC1 is a lien on a specific item. I deal with them all the time. The bank usually takes out a UCC1 on their customer's property (like backhoes, trucks, tools,etc). They are normally not used on buildings. At my day job, our bank has a UCC1 filing on our equipment. I think a bank knows what a UCC1 is. And I don't have a PhD. Tom Newark, CA 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joanmcq Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 'Leasing' solar panels is a crock. It's more like the company is leasing your roof to put the panels up; I was flabbergasted when Solar City started promoting this, but Elon Musk is laughing his way to the bank. I've had several clients buy panels, and most have no electric bills now, even in summer. I'd like to put panels on a pole barn or carport. My roof isn't really suitable, but I've plenty of land to put em up anywhere I want to. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richcpaman Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Getting the lien on the property makes sense. They still own the solar panels, the homeowner does not. Just like if the PhD went to "Aaron Rents" and rented a new barcolounger for $20 a week. He doesn't "own" the chair. They do make it easy at the leasing firms to substitute to lien or subordinate to another refinancing or even sale. But it makes for extra steps. And if you did not read your contract, or understand what you were doing, you are an idiot. Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Posted April 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 <snip> And if you did not read your contract, or understand what you were doing, you are an idiot. Rich The point is, if they are flat-out stating "this is NOT a lien" -- but it actually IS a lien, then THAT is deception and fraud. And the entire POINT of posting this was so if clients ASK US we have yet another data point for them to consider. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richcpaman Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Cathy: I knew that it was a lien. I knew what happens in these cases, thank you for the additional information about it. It may have different terminology in different states, and I have noted over the years that Wells Fargo can be somewhat extreme in their underwriting practices. The PhD guy was still an idiot. Someone puts $20-30K of equipment on your house that you do not have to pay for and they wonder if there wasn't "something" to secure the sellers interest? I mean, really? Should it be in bold letters in the contract? Sure. Why not, its a serious commitment for 20 years and the obligation to whom ever buys the house from you. Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Posted April 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 The important part is that, when asked point blank, the leasing party LIED. I still think that is unconscionable. And deceptive. And if my clients ask about buying versus leasing, I will make sure to point out that there WILL be a lien on their property for the duration of the lease. I also note that when my husband and I were given the spiel about solar panels (being pushed by our town), there was NO mention of a lien on the property. We chose to buy - and apparently were the FIRST people this company had dealt with that bought instead of leased. I wonder how many of them will be *very* unhappily surprised when they go to refinance or sell? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.