Mr*** received permission to operate his system from the utility company on 5/19/17, days after customer filed this complaintThe repairs were completed on 5/31/and the customer expressed his gratitude with our services
Mr*** *** has agreed to close the complaint for 1st Light Energy, Incon the Revdex.com website as both parties have come to an agreement. Please contact *** *** with any questions at: *** Sincerely,EMAIL (002)*** *** | Executive Assistant
Our response to the customer is as follows: We appreciate you reaching out to usAccording to your solar monitoring, your system is producing wellWe would be more than happy to perform a free site assessmentPlease email us the last months electric bills and we will analyze your usage
since solarOur email address is ***
I am rejecting this response because: this complaint has not been resolvedThe business contacted me to resume resolution of the complaint but the system has not been fixed as was previously assured and assumed by service manager
14/of my panels that were installed in were never even turned on Working with service manager currently to fix system and come to an agreement on a satisfactory resolution
The customer had a pre-existing roof leak issue that was not disclosed The leak is not solar related Relayed to the customer we would be more than helpful to remove panels so a roofer can fix the issue The photos my technician taken shows damage that was pre-existing due to the discoloration of the plywood and other material affected from the leak. Thank you*** ***
*** *** is a former contractor who was trying to abuse the system by giving a 1st light referral incentive to his wife. Our referral incentive, per our policy is for 1st Light Customers only and therefore he wouldn’t be eligible for it since they are not 1st light
customers. In the complaint *** claims he’s a customer, when in fact he is not a 1st light customer, but rather a disgruntled contractor who was trying to work the system
We have been working with the customer to get the Solar installed The customer was asked to pay the green sky payment and will be reimbursed in full every month his system is not installed. Thank you*** ***
Mr*** has not contacted 1st Light Energy reporting concerns with his solar systemMr***'s system was installed per contractPer his solar monitoring, the system has exceeded all benchmarks for productionWe welcome the opportunity to analyze Mr***'s electric bills to determine if a
larger system may be required to cover his usage
Spoke with *** *** at *** who gave you information in regard to property tax abatement *** *** doesn’t actually have anything to do with the property tax abatement as they aren’t submitted through *** *** but through HUB Portal permitting Submitting for solar
applications and tax abatement's are part of the initial process Certain forms like the PTAfor property tax abatement are required beforehandOnce a job is submitted and approved, and the permit has been awarded…the job is locked for amendments and the Hub portal doesn’t give you an option to add the PTA4. The customer waived his right to file for tax abatement during the contract signing process, he has uploaded the waiver form. Thank you*** ***
I am rejecting this response because:the company was supposed to receive15000 dollars as loan amount I have email clarifying this amount but they withdrew $28000.00 secondly if the loan agreement which they are mentioning they were to get 80percent of installation cost and the installation cost is as per contract around 15000dollars so how did they take out 28000 dollars on my account from Mosaic why the advance and rebates not adjusted now secondly the contract was to install 23 panels they installed only 20or 21 panels of 300+ watts no one gave walk through can they produce a document or name of person who was explained the functioning of systemthe contract was to give min of specific amont of KWH which is not being acheived or received by us from records of 2months of PSEG records so that is not as per contractstill the company says we have not cheated regarding dropping my call there accounts rep was called numerous times she hung up the calls behaved rudely
I am rejecting this response because:first the statement made by the business is untrue and they have never attempted to clarify the issue but the example they are saying is not what it should be thay have already accepted theoritically for not putting in panels as promised but also if you account for energy losses how can the lesser number panels generate the same energy also to take variables like clouds etc so accounting these the reduction in panels as explained is not correct also they were paid by the financer directly so why they went against the contract and withdraw the amount which was not as per contract why are they now not going to lender and clarify or resolve the issue did they ever attempt to resolve three way none of the steps have been taken but only just throwing ball from their end to lenders pocket
There has been some confusion as the customer has stated, but we want to assure the customer that we haven't cheated anyone out of anything. Quite simply the contract has a total system cost of $28,950....
That is the amount of money that the customer is responsible to ensure that 1st light energy receives for our goods and services provided which we did receive. The way we are paid for the total system cost is broken up in different methods and in this case by loan, and a rebate from a SREC company. The customer signed a separate loan agreement with a company called [redacted] . The financial complaints the customer has are with this company not ours so if they want to file a Revdex.com complaint it needs to be with them. We cant speak for them, but we do know how they operate and they way their offer works. The loan through [redacted] is set up as such that the remaining cost after the SREC rebate is received is put into one loan. That total amount is eligible for a 30% federal tax credit, so [redacted] gives the customer 18 months to file, claim, and receive that 30% federal tax credit. [redacted] expects the customer to pay off that 30% before the 18 months, and if the customer doesn't then the loan will re-amortize and have a higher interest rate and loan payment. After the 30% of the loan is paid off that would leave the customer with a loan amount of $15,000. as the customer states. We have instructed [redacted] that is how the loan should be set up, so if there is a problem with the loan the customer needs to file a Complaint against that company not ours since we have done everything we could The legal loan documents and terms are with another company. We are still willing to assist in any way possible to help the customer to work with their loan company. The claims that we hung up on the customer saying we that weren't ready to resolve cant be addressed because no one in our company is aware of such a conversation existing so we can only speculate that there must have been some type of miscommunication or misunderstanding. We would never intentionally hang up on a customer. The last part of the complaint we can address is her system working correctly. We walked the customer though turning on the system on the phone and performed some checks to make sure the system was on. Since the customer states they believe there system isn't working correctly we will make a service case so we can make sure it is working correctly and take any steps necessary . Thank you,
Unfortunately, there is no reference of the customer receiving the NYC Property Tax Abatement. We can look into going back and resubmitting the permit with the abatement, which has been done once before.There are fees associated with this though. Please let us know if you would be interested.
I am rejecting this response because:When they first sold us the solar panels no one mentioned that the payment were set to increase on a yearly basis. I understand that they are not [redacted], but they are the ones that sold the product in another language then what the contract was written in. I appreciate their willingness to solve the dispute with this payment plan, but it doesn't work for me. I do not want these solar panels, and this is not what I had agreed to upon purchase.
1st Light Energy goes great lengths to provide great customer service and quality workmanship. That goes without saying that mistakes can happen. On April 3rd, 2017, I spoke with [redacted] to discuss his review and how we can remedy his negative experience. I apologized for the lack of...
communication from his account manager and that we didn’t recognize his experience sooner. Per [redacted] request, he was assigned a new account manager to re-establish his communication with 1st Light. His main frustration was the long wait time to receive his referral checks. I explained to [redacted] our standard procedure: referral checks are paid out approximately 6 weeks after a system is turned on. After investigating the accounts referred by [redacted], one had been turned on in late February and his check was very close to being issued, the other customer did not yet have his system turned on and we were waiting on the local utility to complete their final inspection, something that is out of 1st Light’s control. [redacted] seemed reasonable and we rushed the first check within a few days. After confirming that his frustrations have been alleviated, I asked if he’d kindly remove his negative review. [redacted] agreed and said he would be willing to do that for us. We had a gentleman’s agreement. Later that week I followed up with [redacted] to ensure he received check. [redacted] acknowledged that he received it. I asked if he would now take down the review and he agreed he would. Two more days had passed and the review was still showing. Once again, I called [redacted] and he said he would remove the review. On Monday, April 10th, the review was still up and I called [redacted] again and asked if he would take it down. [redacted] said he would not take it down until he received his other check. I explained that I followed through with my end of the deal and I pushed to take care of him. Furthermore, I could not send the second check since it was not ready to be processed. I have acknowledged our wrongdoing and made steps to move forward in a positive direction. [redacted] failed on his promise after we did everything in our power to treat him fairly and remedy the situation. To keep a review up and continue slandering the company is exactly opposite of what I expected. We strive to provide excellent customer service with quality installations and sometimes we miss the mark. We take all our complaints very seriously and hope you don’t judge the entire company by this one experience.
I have looked into this and here is what I have found out.Your system was approved to be up and running by SCE on 12/22/14. I looked at the production of the system for two years from that time and the system produced 15,925 kWh in two years. From the proposal that you were sold the system was expected to produce 10,133 kWh each year so over the two years that should have been 20,266 kWh. So if we take the actual to what was estimated then we see the system produced 79% of expected even though there was a wiring issue which is a difference of 4,321. One thing to note is that contractually we did not offer any production guarantees and we do feel there is some responsibility on the customer to monitor their system which is why we install monitoring. Obviously if we are made aware of a warrantable issue then we need to get it fixed but we can’t fix what we don’t know. That being said I do want to ensure our customers that even though contractually we don’t have any obligation here I do want to work out a fair resolution. Whenever I have a customer come to us about paying for under generation and getting paid for what was not delivered I ask this question. If the system produces more than expected are you willing to pay us more since it did better? If we take the 4,321 kWh’s that were short and times that by an electric rate of $.19 then we get to an amount of $864.20. So here are my two proposed solutions:1-we split the difference which is $432.10 since there was some obligation on your part to check the system and notify us of an issue. 2-I will pay the entire $864.20 for the total under production but if the system produces more in the future you agree to pay me the same rate for anything over the 10,122 that was part of the proposal?I want to be fair and I think that both of these options accomplish this.As for the Instantaneous Power showing offline I am not sure why that is the case. It looks like the locus monitor has not reported the last couple days. I will have service look into this. Any chance that it has lost its network connect or been unplugged?
[redacted] has had a pre-existing roof leak issue by his front window. My technician who was on site to inspect the system and the roof leak issue. During my technician visit he found the solar system to be in complete functional state with no issue's. The generation values were...
compared to the values on the Enlighten website where the data from the customers system gets sent. These numbers were found to be identical. 1st Light Energy compared the generation numbers to the expected estimates and also found the system to be doing better than expected. The customers roof leak issue is not solar related and has been an ongoing issue in the customers home for quite sometime to cause dry rot in some places. There is also a section on the window that has been repaired prior from the type of material used and the stains. The customer changes his number to where 1st Light Energy can not get in contact with him. I checked my call log and voice mail history and found the customer has not called myself once to discuss. 1st Light Energy has also extended our services to the customer if and when he needed the panels removed so a qualified roofer can fix the issue, 1st Light Energy would coordinate the appointment. Points:1. Customer roof had a preexisting issue that was not disclosed by customer2. Solar system is producing better than expected since system turn onThank you [redacted] - 1st Light Energy - Warranty and Service Manager[redacted]
Mr*** received permission to operate his system from the utility company on 5/19/17, days after customer filed this complaintThe repairs were completed on 5/31/and the customer expressed his gratitude with our services
Mr*** *** has agreed to close the complaint for 1st Light Energy, Incon the Revdex.com website as both parties have come to an agreement. Please contact *** *** with any questions at: *** Sincerely,EMAIL (002)*** *** | Executive Assistant
Our response to the customer is as follows: We appreciate you reaching out to usAccording to your solar monitoring, your system is producing wellWe would be more than happy to perform a free site assessmentPlease email us the last months electric bills and we will analyze your usage
since solarOur email address is ***
I am rejecting this response because: this complaint has not been resolvedThe business contacted me to resume resolution of the complaint but the system has not been fixed as was previously assured and assumed by service manager
14/of my panels that were installed in were never even turned on Working with service manager currently to fix system and come to an agreement on a satisfactory resolution
The customer had a pre-existing roof leak issue that was not disclosed The leak is not solar related Relayed to the customer we would be more than helpful to remove panels so a roofer can fix the issue The photos my technician taken shows damage that was pre-existing due to the discoloration of the plywood and other material affected from the leak. Thank you*** ***
*** *** is a former contractor who was trying to abuse the system by giving a 1st light referral incentive to his wife. Our referral incentive, per our policy is for 1st Light Customers only and therefore he wouldn’t be eligible for it since they are not 1st light
customers. In the complaint *** claims he’s a customer, when in fact he is not a 1st light customer, but rather a disgruntled contractor who was trying to work the system
We have been working with the customer to get the Solar installed The customer was asked to pay the green sky payment and will be reimbursed in full every month his system is not installed. Thank you*** ***
Mr*** has not contacted 1st Light Energy reporting concerns with his solar systemMr***'s system was installed per contractPer his solar monitoring, the system has exceeded all benchmarks for productionWe welcome the opportunity to analyze Mr***'s electric bills to determine if a
larger system may be required to cover his usage
Spoke with *** *** at *** who gave you information in regard to property tax abatement *** *** doesn’t actually have anything to do with the property tax abatement as they aren’t submitted through *** *** but through HUB Portal permitting Submitting for solar
applications and tax abatement's are part of the initial process Certain forms like the PTAfor property tax abatement are required beforehandOnce a job is submitted and approved, and the permit has been awarded…the job is locked for amendments and the Hub portal doesn’t give you an option to add the PTA4. The customer waived his right to file for tax abatement during the contract signing process, he has uploaded the waiver form. Thank you*** ***
I am rejecting this response because:the company was supposed to receive15000 dollars as loan amount I have email clarifying this amount but they withdrew $28000.00 secondly if the loan agreement which they are mentioning they were to get 80percent of installation cost and the installation cost is as per contract around 15000dollars so how did they take out 28000 dollars on my account from Mosaic why the advance and rebates not adjusted now secondly the contract was to install 23 panels they installed only 20or 21 panels of 300+ watts no one gave walk through can they produce a document or name of person who was explained the functioning of systemthe contract was to give min of specific amont of KWH which is not being acheived or received by us from records of 2months of PSEG records so that is not as per contractstill the company says we have not cheated regarding dropping my call there accounts rep was called numerous times she hung up the calls behaved rudely
I am rejecting this response because:first the statement made by the business is untrue and they have never attempted to clarify the issue but the example they are saying is not what it should be thay have already accepted theoritically for not putting in panels as promised but also if you account for energy losses how can the lesser number panels generate the same energy also to take variables like clouds etc so accounting these the reduction in panels as explained is not correct also they were paid by the financer directly so why they went against the contract and withdraw the amount which was not as per contract why are they now not going to lender and clarify or resolve the issue did they ever attempt to resolve three way none of the steps have been taken but only just throwing ball from their end to lenders pocket
There has been some confusion as the customer has stated, but we want to assure the customer that we haven't cheated anyone out of anything. Quite simply the contract has a total system cost of $28,950....
That is the amount of money that the customer is responsible to ensure that 1st light energy receives for our goods and services provided which we did receive. The way we are paid for the total system cost is broken up in different methods and in this case by loan, and a rebate from a SREC company. The customer signed a separate loan agreement with a company called [redacted] . The financial complaints the customer has are with this company not ours so if they want to file a Revdex.com complaint it needs to be with them. We cant speak for them, but we do know how they operate and they way their offer works. The loan through [redacted] is set up as such that the remaining cost after the SREC rebate is received is put into one loan. That total amount is eligible for a 30% federal tax credit, so [redacted] gives the customer 18 months to file, claim, and receive that 30% federal tax credit. [redacted] expects the customer to pay off that 30% before the 18 months, and if the customer doesn't then the loan will re-amortize and have a higher interest rate and loan payment. After the 30% of the loan is paid off that would leave the customer with a loan amount of $15,000. as the customer states. We have instructed [redacted] that is how the loan should be set up, so if there is a problem with the loan the customer needs to file a Complaint against that company not ours since we have done everything we could The legal loan documents and terms are with another company. We are still willing to assist in any way possible to help the customer to work with their loan company. The claims that we hung up on the customer saying we that weren't ready to resolve cant be addressed because no one in our company is aware of such a conversation existing so we can only speculate that there must have been some type of miscommunication or misunderstanding. We would never intentionally hang up on a customer. The last part of the complaint we can address is her system working correctly. We walked the customer though turning on the system on the phone and performed some checks to make sure the system was on. Since the customer states they believe there system isn't working correctly we will make a service case so we can make sure it is working correctly and take any steps necessary . Thank you,
Unfortunately, there is no reference of the customer receiving the NYC Property Tax Abatement. We can look into going back and resubmitting the permit with the abatement, which has been done once before.There are fees associated with this though. Please let us know if you would be interested.
I am rejecting this response because:When they first sold us the solar panels no one mentioned that the payment were set to increase on a yearly basis. I understand that they are not [redacted], but they are the ones that sold the product in another language then what the contract was written in. I appreciate their willingness to solve the dispute with this payment plan, but it doesn't work for me. I do not want these solar panels, and this is not what I had agreed to upon purchase.
1st Light energy has come to a conclusion and figured out that the rep miss informed him of his info. We aren’t charging him a cancellation fee.
Okay, Hopefully they will resolve this matter in a timely fashion.Tell us why here...
1st Light Energy goes great lengths to provide great customer service and quality workmanship. That goes without saying that mistakes can happen. On April 3rd, 2017, I spoke with [redacted] to discuss his review and how we can remedy his negative experience. I apologized for the lack of...
communication from his account manager and that we didn’t recognize his experience sooner. Per [redacted] request, he was assigned a new account manager to re-establish his communication with 1st Light. His main frustration was the long wait time to receive his referral checks. I explained to [redacted] our standard procedure: referral checks are paid out approximately 6 weeks after a system is turned on. After investigating the accounts referred by [redacted], one had been turned on in late February and his check was very close to being issued, the other customer did not yet have his system turned on and we were waiting on the local utility to complete their final inspection, something that is out of 1st Light’s control. [redacted] seemed reasonable and we rushed the first check within a few days. After confirming that his frustrations have been alleviated, I asked if he’d kindly remove his negative review. [redacted] agreed and said he would be willing to do that for us. We had a gentleman’s agreement. Later that week I followed up with [redacted] to ensure he received check. [redacted] acknowledged that he received it. I asked if he would now take down the review and he agreed he would. Two more days had passed and the review was still showing. Once again, I called [redacted] and he said he would remove the review. On Monday, April 10th, the review was still up and I called [redacted] again and asked if he would take it down. [redacted] said he would not take it down until he received his other check. I explained that I followed through with my end of the deal and I pushed to take care of him. Furthermore, I could not send the second check since it was not ready to be processed. I have acknowledged our wrongdoing and made steps to move forward in a positive direction. [redacted] failed on his promise after we did everything in our power to treat him fairly and remedy the situation. To keep a review up and continue slandering the company is exactly opposite of what I expected. We strive to provide excellent customer service with quality installations and sometimes we miss the mark. We take all our complaints very seriously and hope you don’t judge the entire company by this one experience.
I have looked into this and here is what I have found out.Your system was approved to be up and running by SCE on 12/22/14. I looked at the production of the system for two years from that time and the system produced 15,925 kWh in two years. From the proposal that you were sold the system was expected to produce 10,133 kWh each year so over the two years that should have been 20,266 kWh. So if we take the actual to what was estimated then we see the system produced 79% of expected even though there was a wiring issue which is a difference of 4,321. One thing to note is that contractually we did not offer any production guarantees and we do feel there is some responsibility on the customer to monitor their system which is why we install monitoring. Obviously if we are made aware of a warrantable issue then we need to get it fixed but we can’t fix what we don’t know. That being said I do want to ensure our customers that even though contractually we don’t have any obligation here I do want to work out a fair resolution. Whenever I have a customer come to us about paying for under generation and getting paid for what was not delivered I ask this question. If the system produces more than expected are you willing to pay us more since it did better? If we take the 4,321 kWh’s that were short and times that by an electric rate of $.19 then we get to an amount of $864.20. So here are my two proposed solutions:1-we split the difference which is $432.10 since there was some obligation on your part to check the system and notify us of an issue. 2-I will pay the entire $864.20 for the total under production but if the system produces more in the future you agree to pay me the same rate for anything over the 10,122 that was part of the proposal?I want to be fair and I think that both of these options accomplish this.As for the Instantaneous Power showing offline I am not sure why that is the case. It looks like the locus monitor has not reported the last couple days. I will have service look into this. Any chance that it has lost its network connect or been unplugged?
[redacted] has had a pre-existing roof leak issue by his front window. My technician who was on site to inspect the system and the roof leak issue. During my technician visit he found the solar system to be in complete functional state with no issue's. The generation values were...
compared to the values on the Enlighten website where the data from the customers system gets sent. These numbers were found to be identical. 1st Light Energy compared the generation numbers to the expected estimates and also found the system to be doing better than expected. The customers roof leak issue is not solar related and has been an ongoing issue in the customers home for quite sometime to cause dry rot in some places. There is also a section on the window that has been repaired prior from the type of material used and the stains. The customer changes his number to where 1st Light Energy can not get in contact with him. I checked my call log and voice mail history and found the customer has not called myself once to discuss. 1st Light Energy has also extended our services to the customer if and when he needed the panels removed so a qualified roofer can fix the issue, 1st Light Energy would coordinate the appointment. Points:1. Customer roof had a preexisting issue that was not disclosed by customer2. Solar system is producing better than expected since system turn onThank you [redacted] - 1st Light Energy - Warranty and Service Manager[redacted]
We are currently working with the customer to resolve the issue.