5 hours ago, Bramco said:

So by 5.8, you can self certify.
 

5.8 Where you are unable to provide MCS or equivalent certification under clause 5.5, you confirm that you are satisfied that the generation asset has been installed by a competent professional and meets all required industry standards and guidelines. Octopus accepts no liability for any loss, damage or injury resulting from the installation.

Yes but they can still refuse pretty much for an arbitrary reason.  Still an improvement tho.

 

5.7 If you are unable to provide the certification described in clause 5.5 above, you will need to provide us with any information about your installation that we may request. We reserve the right to refuse you access to the Export Tariff in circumstances where we haven’t been provided with sufficient information about the installation of the generation asset or where we are not satisfied as to the safety, integrity or otherwise of the installation.

 

Unfortunately the "no plans" you've received @Dillsue isn't lying to you; as it was in the days where they were claiming that regs prevented them offering an export tariff without MCS.

 

I don't think you have any leverage there; other that to ask them to confirm which of their T&C's they're citing in that response.

 

Which should force a response given their obligation to be honest with customers. 

 

15 hours ago, JamesPa said:

I asked MCS that question and they eventually answered that the PD rules were written by, the and the text of MCS-020 approved by, dluhc.  So basically they are denying that it's deliberate on their part.

Bet they didn't complain though - kerching!

 

15 hours ago, JamesPa said:

I have submitted an foi to dluhc

It'll be interesting to see what they respond with. As far as I'm aware, regs or specific mandatory standards should not be used in planning guidance as that's a matter for the Building Regs and other statutory regs. Planning is, and always has been, a mainly subjective process.

 

15 hours ago, JamesPa said:

I have written to my MP (Conservative) asking her how the government defends creating a closed shop which stifles innovation and restricts supply, and other related but less 'loaded' questions.  I await the response.

I'm going to do this too, any pointers on specific content so that it's noted as the same issue of concern?

@JamesPa PM me if you'd prefer.

13 hours ago, markocosic said:

Unfortunately the "no plans" you've received @Dillsue isn't lying to you; as it was in the days where they were claiming that regs prevented them offering an export tariff without MCS.

 

I don't think you have any leverage there; other that to ask them to confirm which of their T&C's they're citing in that response.

 

Which should force a response given their obligation to be honest with customers. 

 

I'm not looking to hold them to account over "lying" as lots of people in all walks of life including large seemingly professional organisations get their knickers in a twist over things they should fully understand. I'm hoping that repeatedly going back to them with a solid  argument as to why they should accept non MCS export will eventually land on the right desk and trigger a memo to all their teams clarifying their TS and Cs. It's hard to see a more solid argument to accept non MCS export than their own TS and Cs so let's see how that plays out. Just weighing up adding more PV if its a goer:)

I applied for non MCS scheme on Friday will see how it goes. Cut and paste the T&C's in to the email, used my G98 commissioning cert and used the words in the T&C's to declare I was happy with the install...

33 minutes ago, JohnMo said:

I applied for non MCS scheme on Friday will see how it goes. Cut and paste the T&C's in to the email, used my G98 commissioning cert and used the words in the T&C's to declare I was happy with the install...

Fingers crossed for you. Be nice to have a precedent set. Been watching 6.5kw disappear into the grid for free since late morning!!