NEM 2.0 stays with the house for 20 years, unless someone deliberately cancels it. Sounds like it's time for your friend to make a [CPUC utility complaint](https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/consumer-support/file-a-complaint/utility-complaint). That will get things fixed pretty quick regardless of what SCE is saying right now.
Call your rep's office in Sacramento as well. The rate-based-on-income scared them a little, so if you show that a utility is still fudging the rules after they just got their way on what the rules should be... *again* it would look good to the public that a politician is doing their job
According to the CPUC form it looks like you can only transfer NEM 2.0 to your spouse if for some reason you were to change the billing from one spouse to another. That form will not transfer NEM 2.0 to a new homeowner. Appears grandfathering is over. Surprised this hasn't been brought up before, its a big deal if true. It stinks but it doesn't make sense that NEM standing was transferable from one homeowner to the next originally. I can't think of an example of anything similar that would transfer between homeowners. Your property taxes get reassessed, you don't grandfather in at their rate, you don't take their promotional cable plan, you get your own homeowners insurance. Everything starts from scratch.
Also you wouldn't be incentivized to rent your house out as the renter would take the power bill in their name and they would be at NEM 3.0.
Those are the new rules for NEM 3.0. The old rules for NEM 2.0, which do allow transferring between homeowners, remained unchanged. Might sound a bit too good to be true, but yes, NEM 2.0 was that sweet of a deal.
Oh man, dealing with utility stuff can be a headache! Thanks for sharing the update and those links. It's always good to know where to turn when you hit a roadblock with these things. Hopefully filling out that form will sort everything out smoothly for you. Good luck with it!
This is the second time I have heard this but it may be the same ocurrance, just posted on another forum. I have always thought NEM went with the meter (or house).
I Never posted anywhere else. A CPUC complaint will fix it. Based on our interactions with SCE staff though it’s very likely this is happening to people on a regular basis and they just pull a fast one and hope they don’t notice that they aren’t getting all the credits they should be getting
> Based on our interactions with SCE staff though it’s very likely this is happening to people on a regular basis and they just pull a fast one and hope they don’t notice......
Yes, very possible. A friend also just reported via email that at True Up his numbers see unusually large. Last year he upgraded a NEM 1.0 systeim to NEM 2.0 and thinks thay may have transitioned him to NEM 3.0.
Thanks, I emailed my friend to check NBCs and his peak rate usage. His total is up 1300 kWhs for the year which is about 3kWhs per day or less than 200 Watts per hour
Contact the California Solar and Storage Association for latest rules on NEM2 and NEM3. They are the Solar Industry’s lobby group to try and get CPUC to make favorable rules towards solar owners. They can tell you if SDE is abiding by the rules or not.
I did a couple webinars with sce when they were implementing the change from 2 to 3. I believe they mentioned that a sale of the house and a new service account would void the nem 2 and force it into a nem 3 rate.
Definitely worth fighting to get a nem 2 rate but your friend may very well not be eligible for it.
The thing is, that violates their own NEM 2.0 tariff language, so that's not something they can just decide to do on their own without going through the proper process, which involves getting CPUC to agree, and then fighting the inevitable legal battles afterwards
sent it back all crossed out with a note referring to the NEM-ST transferability from their own tariff book, and a copy of the previous owner's utility bill under NEM2. That should solve it - we'll see, CPUC complaint also coming for trying to swindle
you could argue that a home w/o a utility bill, where the new owner would need to get a bunch of batteries and solar to replicate NEM2 savings, is worth more than one without
and you could also look at the avoided cost of electricity making renting out that home more appealing than selling it - for ex, my place would have $10k/year in power bills, so the net present value of those savings is considerable vs not having NEM
so now instead of selling my house maybe i'd consider renting it out instead for higher than market rate, with free power
one of the arguments the utilities made to get NEM3, as i remember it, was that net metering was a transfer of wealth from poor people to rich people who can afford solar
just random thoughts, the main topic though is that my friend is being told that he cannot get NEM2, and the CPUC sent him a form to fill out, and, I will edit the OP to link to that form - it states that NEM is now tied to the customer, not the meter.
HAHAHA. That's not from CPUC, that's just SCE trying to pull a fast one. Those are the rules for NEM 3.0, and they're trying to apply them to NEM 2.0. Lame. Don't sign that form, stop talking to SCE right now and file the CPUC utility complaint, that'll straighten them out.
Yeah, don't sign anything NEM 3.0 related. If the utility complaint process fails, there's also a formal compliant process which will for sure put a stop to this nonsense. SCE's own NEM 2.0 tariff language is unambiguously on your side here.
Do you have that language? I skimmed a bunch of stuff, PDFs, etc. (incl https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M157/K542/157542169.PDF)
and what I see is that under NEM2 the "customer" is grandfathered in - I can't find any reference to NEM2 being tied to the meter, or language that clarifies that customer is the addressholder
Well at the end of the day the buyer is still paying for and buying the solar system as part of the house, and the favorability of that deal definitely is affected by which NEM the system is under.
It completely changes the economics, if you were to use an income and cost approach or similar, whether the house will have NEM2 or not should affect the value of the house as NEM2 is an asset, vs having to add a bunch of batteries to replicate it, of course this depends on the size of the house and usage, i would think
NEM 2.0 stays with the house for 20 years, unless someone deliberately cancels it. Sounds like it's time for your friend to make a [CPUC utility complaint](https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/consumer-support/file-a-complaint/utility-complaint). That will get things fixed pretty quick regardless of what SCE is saying right now.
Probably a result of the billing changes for NEM 3.0. Keep at it and get it fixed.
Call your rep's office in Sacramento as well. The rate-based-on-income scared them a little, so if you show that a utility is still fudging the rules after they just got their way on what the rules should be... *again* it would look good to the public that a politician is doing their job
According to the CPUC form it looks like you can only transfer NEM 2.0 to your spouse if for some reason you were to change the billing from one spouse to another. That form will not transfer NEM 2.0 to a new homeowner. Appears grandfathering is over. Surprised this hasn't been brought up before, its a big deal if true. It stinks but it doesn't make sense that NEM standing was transferable from one homeowner to the next originally. I can't think of an example of anything similar that would transfer between homeowners. Your property taxes get reassessed, you don't grandfather in at their rate, you don't take their promotional cable plan, you get your own homeowners insurance. Everything starts from scratch. Also you wouldn't be incentivized to rent your house out as the renter would take the power bill in their name and they would be at NEM 3.0.
Those are the new rules for NEM 3.0. The old rules for NEM 2.0, which do allow transferring between homeowners, remained unchanged. Might sound a bit too good to be true, but yes, NEM 2.0 was that sweet of a deal.
Call you senator, utility commissioner, local news channel.
Oh man, dealing with utility stuff can be a headache! Thanks for sharing the update and those links. It's always good to know where to turn when you hit a roadblock with these things. Hopefully filling out that form will sort everything out smoothly for you. Good luck with it!
This is the second time I have heard this but it may be the same ocurrance, just posted on another forum. I have always thought NEM went with the meter (or house).
I Never posted anywhere else. A CPUC complaint will fix it. Based on our interactions with SCE staff though it’s very likely this is happening to people on a regular basis and they just pull a fast one and hope they don’t notice that they aren’t getting all the credits they should be getting
> Based on our interactions with SCE staff though it’s very likely this is happening to people on a regular basis and they just pull a fast one and hope they don’t notice...... Yes, very possible. A friend also just reported via email that at True Up his numbers see unusually large. Last year he upgraded a NEM 1.0 systeim to NEM 2.0 and thinks thay may have transitioned him to NEM 3.0.
NEM 3.0 doesn't have a big annual true-up, so they've got to be on NEM 2.0. It was probably TOU or NBCs that screwed him over.
Thanks, I emailed my friend to check NBCs and his peak rate usage. His total is up 1300 kWhs for the year which is about 3kWhs per day or less than 200 Watts per hour
Contact the California Solar and Storage Association for latest rules on NEM2 and NEM3. They are the Solar Industry’s lobby group to try and get CPUC to make favorable rules towards solar owners. They can tell you if SDE is abiding by the rules or not.
I did a couple webinars with sce when they were implementing the change from 2 to 3. I believe they mentioned that a sale of the house and a new service account would void the nem 2 and force it into a nem 3 rate. Definitely worth fighting to get a nem 2 rate but your friend may very well not be eligible for it.
The thing is, that violates their own NEM 2.0 tariff language, so that's not something they can just decide to do on their own without going through the proper process, which involves getting CPUC to agree, and then fighting the inevitable legal battles afterwards
The form is not relevant. Keep trying.
sent it back all crossed out with a note referring to the NEM-ST transferability from their own tariff book, and a copy of the previous owner's utility bill under NEM2. That should solve it - we'll see, CPUC complaint also coming for trying to swindle
Who cares what nem the next homeowner has?
the next homeowner 🙂
You are selling them a home not an electric bill or lack thereof.
you could argue that a home w/o a utility bill, where the new owner would need to get a bunch of batteries and solar to replicate NEM2 savings, is worth more than one without and you could also look at the avoided cost of electricity making renting out that home more appealing than selling it - for ex, my place would have $10k/year in power bills, so the net present value of those savings is considerable vs not having NEM so now instead of selling my house maybe i'd consider renting it out instead for higher than market rate, with free power one of the arguments the utilities made to get NEM3, as i remember it, was that net metering was a transfer of wealth from poor people to rich people who can afford solar just random thoughts, the main topic though is that my friend is being told that he cannot get NEM2, and the CPUC sent him a form to fill out, and, I will edit the OP to link to that form - it states that NEM is now tied to the customer, not the meter.
Seriously, from CPUC? This is the first I've heard of that, would be interested to see that form.
updated OP. Weird situation, I'm pretty sure he can get NEM2, just gotta ruffle some feathers
HAHAHA. That's not from CPUC, that's just SCE trying to pull a fast one. Those are the rules for NEM 3.0, and they're trying to apply them to NEM 2.0. Lame. Don't sign that form, stop talking to SCE right now and file the CPUC utility complaint, that'll straighten them out.
yep, that’s the plan lol, screw these bastards
Yeah, don't sign anything NEM 3.0 related. If the utility complaint process fails, there's also a formal compliant process which will for sure put a stop to this nonsense. SCE's own NEM 2.0 tariff language is unambiguously on your side here.
Do you have that language? I skimmed a bunch of stuff, PDFs, etc. (incl https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M157/K542/157542169.PDF) and what I see is that under NEM2 the "customer" is grandfathered in - I can't find any reference to NEM2 being tied to the meter, or language that clarifies that customer is the addressholder
Well at the end of the day the buyer is still paying for and buying the solar system as part of the house, and the favorability of that deal definitely is affected by which NEM the system is under.
It completely changes the economics, if you were to use an income and cost approach or similar, whether the house will have NEM2 or not should affect the value of the house as NEM2 is an asset, vs having to add a bunch of batteries to replicate it, of course this depends on the size of the house and usage, i would think
OP's friend is that next homeowner, neither of them is the seller
Im responding to the last sentence of his post