Solar lawsuits in California: cases, settlements and your options

The three kinds of solar lawsuit

Public enforcement: the 2026 Vivint Solar judgment

On February 19, 2026, the district attorneys of San Francisco, Riverside, San Diego, Alameda and Fresno counties announced a stipulated judgment against Vivint Solar, entered in Riverside Superior Court as case CVRI2506720. According to the San Francisco District Attorney, the complaint charged deceptive practices in selling power purchase agreements: mischaracterizing ties to local utility companies, overstating energy and cost savings, and misrepresenting contract cancellation rights. SF District Attorney·checked Sep 23, 2026

“Without admitting liability,” Vivint Solar agreed to pay $1,300,000 in civil penalties and investigative costs and $3,000,000 into a restitution fund. The announcement says consumers harmed by systems sold between August 3, 2016 and October 8, 2020 can submit claims, with notice and claim details to be provided by Vivint Solar and Sunrun on their websites. The judgment also bars pulling credit reports without written consent, creating accounts without approval, failing to provide contract translations and enforcing unlawful liquidated-damages clauses.

If you had a Vivint Solar PPA in that period, look for the official claim instructions from those sources and keep your contract and bills handy. The practices named in the complaint are the same ones covered in how solar sales tactics work and your rights with door-to-door solar sales.

What homeowners complain about most

CSLB publishes solar complaint counts on its Solar Smart page. For fiscal year 2022/2023 it received 2,263 solar complaints and investigated 1,625. Of those investigated, 1,232 involved workmanship or abandonment, 323 misrepresentation or fraud, 33 unlicensed contractors, 19 permit violations and 11 unregistered salespeople. CSLB·checked Sep 23, 2026 Most disputes, in other words, are about work that was done badly or not finished, which is usually a contract claim against a specific company rather than something a class action or news story will fix.

The net billing (NEM 3.0) lawsuit

The best-known solar case in California is not about a company at all. Environmental groups challenged the CPUC’s 2022 decision (D.22-12-056) that created the net billing tariff. On August 7, 2025, the California Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Kruger joined by the other six justices, held that the Court of Appeal had applied an “unduly deferential standard of review” and sent the case back, adding that it did not decide whether the tariff itself was lawful. California Supreme Court·checked Sep 23, 2026 On March 9, 2026, the Court of Appeal applied the stricter review and wrote, “we again affirm the Decision.” Court of Appeal·checked Sep 23, 2026

For homeowners, that means the net billing rules still apply to new systems. The details, including what it means if you are on an older plan, are in the California rooftop solar credits ruling explained and NEM 2.0 vs NEM 3.0.

How to check a lawsuit or settlement notice

• Find the court and case number. A real case has both; look it up on that court’s own website.
• Check the source. Prosecutors announce judgments on their own sites; a settlement administrator is appointed by the court.
• Don’t pay to learn about a case. Be wary of anyone who wants a fee or your account logins to “add you” to a settlement.
• Check the company’s license. The CSLB lookup lets you verify a contractor’s license “including complaint disclosure.”
• Check who is advising you. Under Business and Professions Code § 6125, only an active licensee of the State Bar may practice law in California.

The Federal Trade Commission’s solar guide gives the same basic warning for any solar deal: never deal with a company that “pressures you for a quick decision” or “asks you to pay in cash,” and report problems to ReportFraud.ftc.gov or your state attorney general. FTC·checked Sep 23, 2026

Bringing your own case

Most homeowners with a solar dispute are not part of any class action; their path is their own claim. The usual order is a written demand, a CSLB complaint, then small claims or a lawyer depending on the amount. In small claims, an individual can sue for up to $12,500 without a lawyer. California Courts·checked Sep 23, 2026 A few laws are especially relevant to solar:

• Business and Professions Code § 7160 lets someone induced into a home improvement contract by knowingly false or fraudulent statements recover damages, a $500 penalty and reasonable attorney’s fees.
• Section 7031(b) lets a person who used an unlicensed contractor sue to recover all compensation paid.
• CSLB discipline can include citations with civil penalties of up to $30,000 and orders to repair or pay, though CSLB “cannot guarantee that you will get any money back.” CSLB·checked Sep 23, 2026

When to bring in a lawyer, how to find one and what the fee agreement must say are covered in finding an attorney to sue a solar company. If a contractor took a deposit and disappeared, start with what to do when a solar contractor took your money.

Avoiding the next dispute

Nearly every case above started with a contract the homeowner didn’t fully understand. Before signing anything new, read the contract red flags, check how dealer fees inflate a loan, and verify the contractor’s license. If a lease or PPA is on the table, compare it with a purchase using cash, loan, lease or PPA.