Home solar sales fraud

Also called: solar panel scam · predatory solar loans · free solar scam · rooftop solar bait-and-switch · solar savings scam

Home solar sales fraud sells rooftop panels with false promises, "free" systems, tax credits that don't apply, savings that never arrive, while the real cost sits in a long loan the homeowner signed on a tablet. In 2026 New York sued a solar company and two lenders, alleging about $275 million was generated this way in the state.

Key facts

Category
Purchase & marketplace
First documented
2023
Typical loss
$160k–$160k USD, per victim
Main channels
social media ads, telemarketing, door-to-door sales, tablet e-signing at the kitchen table
Who is targeted
Older homeowners and fixed-income households, whom New York's complaint alleges were specifically targeted; Homeowners who answer a social-media ad for a free roof or free solar panels; People receiving repeated cold calls from someone who sounds like a utility or government program; Homeowners worried about rising electric bills, the hook Connecticut's Attorney General cited in warning consumers to vet any deal
Documented origins
United States
Main targets
United States
Case files
3 documented cases
Last reviewed
2026-09-19
Anatomy of a home solar sales fraudAnatomy of a home solar sales fraud. A 'free' or 'savings-guaranteed' offer, paid for by a loan the homeowner didn't understand. 1. The hook: A social-media ad for a free roof or panels, or a cold call, tens of millions of Do Not Call Registry calls in the FTC and Arizona case. 2. The borrowed authority: Callers allegedly claim a utility or government link and say payments will replace the electric bill. 3. The visit and the tablet: A salesperson has the homeowner e-sign on a tablet; New York alleges contracts went unreviewed with the customer. 4. The loan behind the offer: The 'free' system is financed; New York alleges lending fees hidden in inflated prices, with one loan reported at $160,000. 5. The claimed incentives: Buyers are told tax credits and incentives will offset the cost; New York alleges they were misrepresented. 6. Installation, delay or failure: Unpermitted work, systems that can't connect or are never activated, and delays while old bills still arrive. 7. The bill keeps coming: Loan payments continue whatever the panels do; Texas alleges charges for panels removed or damaged. The diagram marks stage 3 as the point where the scheme can still be stopped: Stop here: no signature on the day of the pitch. Connecticut's Vision Solar judgment bans same-day contract signing as an industry standard, and a real offer survives a night of reading the loan terms.Anatomy of a home solar sales fraudA 'free' or 'savings-guaranteed' offer, paid for by a loan the homeowner didn't understand.1The hookA social-media ad for afree roof or panels, or acold call, tens of millionsof Do Not Call Registrycalls in the FTC andArizona case.Minutes2The borrowedauthorityCallers allegedly claim autility or government linkand say payments willreplace the electric bill.The first call3The visit and thetabletA salesperson has thehomeowner e-sign on atablet; New York allegescontracts went unreviewedwith the customer.One visit4The loan behind theofferThe 'free' system isfinanced; New York allegeslending fees hidden ininflated prices, with oneloan reported at $160,000.Days5The claimedincentivesBuyers are told tax creditsand incentives will offsetthe cost; New York allegesthey were misrepresented.During the sale6Installation, delayor failureUnpermitted work, systemsthat can't connect or arenever activated, and delayswhile old bills stillarrive.Months7The bill keeps comingLoan payments continuewhatever the panels do;Texas alleges charges forpanels removed or damaged.YearsWhere it can still be stopped: stage 3Stop here: no signature on the day of the pitch. Connecticut's Vision Solar judgment bans same-day contract signing as an industry standard, and a real offersurvives a night of reading the loan terms.Stages drawn from New York's March 2026 suit against Attyx, Connecticut's 2024 Vision Solar judgment, the 2023 FTC and Arizona case against Solar Xchange and Vision Solar, and Texas's 2026 CAM Solar suit. Most conduct described is alleged, not adjudicated.howscamswork.com
The stages of the scheme, in order, with the point where it can still be stopped.

What it is

A homeowner is offered rooftop solar, sometimes a “free” roof, sometimes a system that will “replace” the electric bill, and ends up with a loan they didn’t understand, for a system that saves less than promised or doesn’t work as promised at all.

Selling solar is legal. What the enforcement cases below describe is the way it was sold: false claims about savings and government incentives, callers implying a link to a utility or an agency, contracts signed on a tablet without being reviewed, and financing costs folded into the price. Everything about individual companies on this page is drawn from government announcements or press reports of them, and they are allegations unless a case says otherwise.

The scale in the biggest recent case is large. New York’s Attorney General alleges that Attyx, formerly SUNco, generated about $275 million in the state through the conduct described in the complaint.

How it actually works

  1. The hook

    An ad on social media offers a free roof or free solar panels, or a phone call arrives, in the Arizona and FTC case, the alleged call volume ran to tens of millions of calls to numbers on the Do Not Call Registry.

  2. The borrowed authority

    According to the FTC and Arizona, some callers falsely claimed an affiliation with a utility or a government agency, and told consumers their monthly payment would replace their electric bill.

  3. The visit and the tablet

    A salesperson visits and has the homeowner e-sign on a tablet. New York’s complaint alleges contracts were unsigned or not reviewed with the customer.

    Where it could have stopped

    This is the moment to stop: no signature on the day of the pitch. Connecticut’s Vision Solar judgment makes a ban on same-day contract signing an industry standard, and a real offer can survive a night of reading the loan terms.

  4. The loan behind the offer

    The “free” or “no-cost” system is financed. New York alleges lending fees were hidden inside inflated prices, and reporting describes one homeowner’s loan at $160,000.

  5. The claimed incentives

    Buyers are told that government incentives and tax credits will offset the cost. New York alleges these were misrepresented, and that the targets were households unlikely to qualify.

  6. Installation, delay or failure

    Connecticut’s judgment cites unpermitted work that left systems unable to connect to the grid and, in some cases, systems never activated. Arizona’s release alleges installation delays meant customers paid for financing and their old utility bill at once.

  7. The bill keeps coming

    The loan payments continue regardless. Texas’s 2026 lawsuit against CAM Solar alleges customers kept being charged for panels that had been removed or damaged; the suit seeks civil penalties and compensation.

Why it works

The pitch fits a real worry. Electric bills are a genuine pressure on households, and Connecticut’s Attorney General framed his warning to homeowners around exactly that.

“Free” and “no money down” hide a financing decision. The price is spread over a loan, so the number that gets discussed at the door is a monthly payment, not the total repaid.

A tablet moves faster than reading. Signing on a screen at the kitchen table, in the alleged New York cases, replaced the pause in which a buyer might have read the terms.

Incentives sound official. Talk of government programs and tax credits, or a caller implying a utility link, borrows credibility the seller doesn’t have, and the FTC and Arizona say some callers falsely claimed affiliations.

The targets are less able to recover. New York alleges older and fixed-income households were deliberately sought out; a large loan is hardest to absorb for exactly those homeowners.

Where it comes from

This is a domestic sales-practices problem, enforced mostly through state attorneys general and civil suits rather than criminal prosecution.

Enforcement is state by state. New York, Connecticut, Arizona and Texas are each cited here, and Connecticut lists further pending suits against other companies, including Sunrun Inc. Those are pending and are not findings.

Lenders are being drawn in. New York names two lenders as defendants, and Connecticut settled with a lender to Vision Solar’s customers in 2025.

Judgments can be hollow. Connecticut’s $5 million judgment against Vision Solar can’t be paid from company assets after its bankruptcy, which is why the state pointed consumers to its Home Improvement Guaranty Fund.

Complaint volumes vary. In the Texas coverage cited here, CAM Solar drew 8 complaints to the Texas Attorney General’s office over five years, compared with 123 for Sunrun and 81 for Sunnova in the same period as reported; a complaint count is not a finding.

Real cases

New York sues Attyx (formerly SUNco) and two lenders over 'free' solar and roof offers

2026 US Ongoing

On March 17, 2026, New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Attyx LLC (formerly SUNco), two of its CEOs, and the lenders Solar Mosaic and WebBank, alleging the company sold solar systems and home repairs as free, misrepresented government incentives, and left homeowners, many of them elderly or on fixed incomes, with loans they had not understood. The complaint puts the amount generated in New York at approximately $275 million. The case is a pending civil lawsuit; none of the allegations have been decided by a court.

Read the case file · 2 sources

Connecticut wins a $5 million judgment against bankrupt Vision Solar

2024 US Settled

In October 2024 a Hartford Superior Court judge entered a $5 million stipulated judgment in the Connecticut Attorney General's suit against Vision Solar, which had been accused of high-pressure sales tactics, misrepresentations, delays and unpermitted work that left some systems unable to connect to the grid, and of pressuring consumers into loans they could not afford. Vision Solar had filed for bankruptcy and is not reorganizing, so it does not have assets to pay the judgment.

Read the case file · 2 sources

FTC and Arizona: Solar Xchange and its owner face a $13.8 million partly suspended penalty over solar telemarketing

2023 US Settled

In July 2023 the FTC and the Arizona Attorney General sued Vision Solar LLC, Solar Xchange LLC (also doing business as Energy Exchange) and Solar Xchange's owner, Mark Getts. The complaint alleged tens of millions of calls to numbers on the Do Not Call Registry, callers who falsely claimed affiliation with a utility or government agency, and misstated energy-bill savings. Solar Xchange and Getts agreed to a proposed order with a $13.8 million civil penalty, partially suspended.

Read the case file · 2 sources

Red flags

  • “Free” solar or a “free” roof. Someone is paying; ask who, and where the loan is.
  • A caller who sounds like a utility or a government program. Hang up and call your utility using the number on your bill.
  • Pressure to sign today, or a tablet handed over before you’ve seen the full loan terms.
  • Promised savings or “your payment replaces your bill” with nothing in writing to support it.
  • Tax credits promised as a certainty. Whether you qualify depends on your own tax situation, not on the salesperson.
  • A loan total you cannot get in writing before signing.
  • Repeated unsolicited calls to a number on the Do Not Call Registry.

If it’s happening to you

Don’t sign anything on the day it is offered, and don’t sign anything on a screen you haven’t been able to read in full.

  1. Ask for the total you’ll repay and the loan terms in writing, separate from the sales pitch.
  2. Check the company against your state attorney general’s press releases and complaint records.
  3. Ask a tax professional about any incentive you’re being promised before you rely on it.
  4. If you’ve already signed, read your contract for cancellation rights and act quickly; look up your state’s rules for home-improvement contracts and ask your attorney general’s office what applies.
  5. Keep everything: the ad, texts, contract, loan documents and payment records.
  6. Report it to your state attorney general’s consumer protection division and to the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. Unwanted sales calls can also be reported to the FTC. See where to report for other countries.
  7. Look for a state relief fund or settlement. Connecticut, for example, has a Home Improvement Guaranty Fund with up to $25,000 per eligible consumer.

Where the money goes

Mostly through ordinary lending and contracting channels, not a laundering chain. The homeowner’s loan pays the installer and the lender, and the alleged harm is in the price and terms rather than in hidden movement of funds.

New York alleges lending fees were concealed inside inflated prices, so part of what the homeowner repays goes to the lender as a fee the customer wasn’t told about. When a company fails, as Vision Solar did, there may be nothing left to pay a judgment, and what recovery exists comes from a state fund or from a separate lender settlement.

The other half of this story

Our sibling site Clean on Paper explains how companies change names and structures, relevant here because New York alleges Attyx kept marketing as LGCY Power after a cease-and-desist order.

By the numbers

No published dataset breaks this scheme out as its own category yet, so there is no chart to show. The data page explains which agency categories exist and why some schemes are invisible in official statistics.

Sources

Every factual claim above traces to one of these. Statistics are reported losses; see methodology for what that does and does not measure.

  1. Attorney General James Sues Home Solar Power Company and Lenders for Cheating New Yorkers Out of Hundreds of Millions of Dollars. New York State Office of the Attorney General. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The March 17, 2026 lawsuit against Attyx (formerly SUNco), Solar Mosaic and WebBank, the allegations, the $275 million figure and the relief sought.
  2. New York Sues Solar Company, Says It Cheated Thousands. NYS Focus. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The 'free roof' social ads, tablet e-signing, 4,500-plus installations, 200-plus complaints, and the $160,000 loan example.
  3. Attorney General Tong Announces $5 Million Judgment Against Bankrupt Vision Solar. Connecticut Office of the Attorney General. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The October 2024 judgment, the allegations, the bankruptcy, the $25,000 guaranty-fund figure and the sales-practice standards.
  4. Attorney General Tong Announces New Developments to Hold Solar Industry Accountable. Connecticut Office of the Attorney General. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The March 2026 SunStrong investigation (about 65 complaints), the Spruce Power 3 settlement, the list of prior actions and pending lawsuits, and the Dividend Finance settlement.
  5. FTC, Law Enforcers Nationwide Announce Enforcement Sweep to Stem the Tide of Illegal Telemarketing Calls to U.S. Consumers. Federal Trade Commission. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The July 2023 case against Vision Solar, Solar Xchange and Mark Getts, the call volume and the $13.8 million partly suspended penalty.
  6. Attorney General Mayes Sues Residential Solar Installation Company and Telemarketer Over Unsubstantiated Savings Claims and Illegal Phone Calls. Office of the Arizona Attorney General. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The utility-impersonation, savings, rebate and installation-delay allegations and the statutes cited.
  7. After years of complaints about rooftop solar industry, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton files first lawsuit as his term winds down. CBS Texas. Accessed 2026-09-19. Supports: The 2026 Texas lawsuit against CAM Solar, its allegations, the complaint counts cited and the civil-penalty relief sought.

Common questions

Is all rooftop solar a scam?

No. Solar itself is a real product, and the cases on this page are enforcement actions against specific companies for how they sold it. The allegations centre on false claims, free systems, guaranteed savings, incentives that didn't apply, and on loans the buyer didn't understand, not on the technology.

What does 'free solar' usually mean in these cases?

In New York's 2026 lawsuit against Attyx, the State alleges 'free' systems and home repairs were paid for through loans, with lending fees hidden inside inflated prices. The lesson is to ask for the total amount you will repay and the loan's terms in writing before signing anything.

Are the lenders responsible too?

New York's complaint names two lenders, Solar Mosaic and WebBank, alleging they collected hidden fees, and Connecticut reached a 2025 settlement with Dividend Finance requiring relief for Vision Solar borrowers. Whether a lender is liable depends on the case; those claims are allegations or settlements, not general rules.

What if the solar company goes bankrupt?

Connecticut's $5 million judgment against Vision Solar could not be paid from company assets because it filed for bankruptcy and is not reorganizing. The state pointed consumers to its Home Improvement Guaranty Fund, with up to $25,000 per eligible consumer. Check whether your state has a similar fund.

How can I check a solar company before signing?

Search your state attorney general's press releases and consumer complaints for the company's name, check whether it holds any required state contractor or licensing registration, and don't sign the same day. Connecticut's Vision Solar judgment itself bans same-day contract signing as an industry standard.

Where the solar loan money goesWhere the solar loan money goes. An ordinary lending chain, the alleged harm is in the price and terms, not hidden movement. Where the solar loan money goesAn ordinary lending chain, the alleged harm is in the price and terms, not hidden movement.A homeowner with asolar loanMonthly loan paymentson a price New Yorkalleges was inflatedto hide lending feesThe lender, alleged totake hidden feesThe loan funds theinstaller's sale, lessthe alleged fees thelender keepsThe solar seller andinstallerIf the company fails,as Vision Solar did, a$5 million judgmentwent unpaid; recoverycame from a state fundof up to $25,000 perconsumerA state fund orsettlement, if anyReversibilityA recall is realistically possible only at the first hop, and only in the first hours. After the money is converted it becomes an investigation, not a refund.How companies change names and structures: Clean on Paper, our sibling sitehttps://cleanonpaper.com/techniques/shell-companies/The direction of the flows is simplified into one chain; the fee allegations are New York's and are unproven. Connecticut figures are from its October 2024 announcement.howscamswork.com
Where the money goes after it leaves, and where it becomes hard to recover.

Report it

Reporting is what produces the enforcement data on this page. Find the right agency and phone number for your country on the report page. If money moved in the last few hours, call your bank first.