Florida Consumer Accuses Better Earth of Multiple Solar Energy System Contract Violations

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action alleges Better Earth has repeatedly violated its customer contracts by failing to install fully operational solar energy systems within the stipulated 90-day period, among other allegedly wrongful conduct. 

Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here. 

According to the 46-page breach-of-contract complaint, the plaintiff, an Orlando, Florida resident, contracted with Better Earth in May 2022 to install a 12.96 kW solar energy system, consisting of 36 solar panels, on her single-family home. Per the plaintiff’s contract with the defendant, the work was set to commence on the date Better Earth performed a site inspection/audit of the consumer’s property and would be completed “within 90 days” from the date of the site inspection, the filing states. 

Although installation of the solar energy system for the plaintiff’s home was contracted to start on May 21, 2022, Better Earth applied for the permit to begin the work 47 days later, on July 6, the lawsuit claims. On December 16, Orange County, Florida issued a certificate of completion after 163 days had passed since the date the permit was issued, meaning, from the commencement of the work to its apparent completion, 209 days had passed, the case states. 

“In other words, nearly four (4) months passed after the ninety (90) day period set forth in the Contract had lapsed,” the suit reads. 

However, the plaintiff’s solar energy system was still not connected to the grid and generating energy as of December 2022, the complaint alleges. 

Further, Better Earth represented to the plaintiff that it would pay for the additional $1 million personal liability umbrella policy she was required to have by Duke Energy, her electric utility, for homes with solar energy systems larger than 10 kW and up to 100 kW, the case relays. However, to date, more than a year after the contract was executed, Better Earth has failed to pay the plaintiff’s premium for this umbrella policy, the suit alleges. 

Further still, the defendant claimed that it would repay the plaintiff for her monthly loan payments toward financing the solar energy system until it was operational, so as to help the consumer avoid being in a situation where she was paying both her electric utility company and the monthly loan payment for the system, the complaint says. 

While Better Earth reimbursed the plaintiff nearly $194 per month for loan payments from November 2022 through April of this year, the company stopped paying these reimbursements after June 2023, the suit alleges. 

According to the case, it was in April of this year, roughly eight months since the initial 90-day installation and completion period had passed, that Better Earth activated the plaintiff’s solar energy system. However, this activation was unlawful given that Better Earth failed to notify the plaintiff’s energy provider, the filing says. 

“In addition, there is no mention of solar production on Plaintiff’s electric bill from Duke Energy, indicating that Duke Energy is unaware that Plaintiff has a solar energy system connected to the grid,” the case states. 

As a result of Better Earth’s apparent failure to notify the plaintiff’s utility provider that her home had been equipped with a solar energy system, a bi-directional meter was never installed on her home by Duke Energy, the case says. Per the suit, this meter would allow the consumer to be credited for any energy that her system produces and flows into the grid, a process known as “net metering.” 

The filing says the plaintiff had no way of knowing a bi-directional meter had not been installed on her home and only learned that it was missing when an independent solar contractor inspected her system in May 2023. 

“Without net metering, Plaintiff has paid higher electric bills each month than she should have with net metering, and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, quantifiable financial harm,” the case claims. 

According to the lawsuit, a number of consumers have complained to the Better Business Bureau about “the same factual allegations” posed by the plaintiff. 

The lawsuit contends the arbitration clause in the contract signed by the plaintiff, an immigrant whose first language is Spanish, is “procedurally and substantively unconscionable” given that a Better Earth agent stayed in the consumer’s home “until she agreed to sign the contract,” requiring her to “sign electronically on a small tablet that rendered the font too small to read, and did not give her the opportunity to read what she was signing.” The suit charges that Better Earth’s “high-pressure sales tactics” were meant to coerce the plaintiff into signing the take-it-or-leave-it contract and “take advantage of her relatively little bargaining power.” 

The lawsuit looks to cover all persons and entities in the United States who contracted with Better Earth for the installation of solar energy systems and for whom the company failed to complete the system within the 90-day contractual period or failed to install a system that was fully operational. 

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.