By: kwittet

kwittet — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 02:51:00 +0000

On the surface this seems to look like a good idea. The problem is there are too many variables to it that will make it a nightmare to impliment. First of all is the part where the house is charged and not the person. Is this hidden loan applied to the cost of the house when you purchase it? Imagine a house that would normally cost say $200,000 but the previous owner has spent the say $20,000 on upgrades and now the price is 220,000? So you have been pre approved for 200,000 and now this home is out of your range? What if it is a rental property which is all inclusive(and yes there are some houses that still have this option) and the tenants dont care whether the windows are open in the winter to get some fresh air? What if the house is destroyed by some natural disaster or fire flood or anything that renders it unlivable. Who or how is this loan going to be repaid? Hopefully not out of tax payers pockets. Another issue is when schemes like this are implemented is that contractors usually inflate there rates just because it is goverment related. can they be made to hold rates for such work in a free market society? Can they be expected not to raise there rates in a free market. What happens if a property sits vacant for a long period which is very possible in this recession. Who pays back the loan? What if the property is taken back by the bank? Are they now on the hook for the payments?
It really is not a bad idea to help the enviroment but at the same time it is a bad idea from an administrative point of view.

Comments on: “Pay as you save” concept from Britain an environmental idea worthy of consideration.

By: kwittet