Kneupper & Covey has won a key arbitration against solar financing company Goodleap in an arbitration in Georgia before a former Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court. It was a total loss for Goodleap, which was held responsible for the actions of its business partner Pink Energy under an agency theory of liability. Not only did the client win around $13,000, but Goodleap had to pay her attorney’s fees and her $90,000 solar loan was cancelled in its entirety.
Goodleap has been sued by the Minnesota Attorney General and accused of charging illegal and deceptive fees to solar customers. This has been referred to by some online as a “Goodleap Special” – i.e., charging huge amounts of money for financing fees that the consumer is told are part of the cost of the solar panels. The arbitration award serves as a warning to consumers – be careful about doing business with Goodleap. You may not even know you are, so watch out for whose name is on the financing contract if you’re purchasing solar panels.
Local Atlanta ABC news station WSB-TV 2 reported on the victory, which could have implications for numerous other customers under collateral estoppel or res judicata theories that could bind Goodleap to the legal decisions. Attorney Jarret Faber from Kneupper & Covey was the lawyer who fought the arbitration and won the award, and was featured in the report:
The arbitrator made a number of key findings against Goodleap. Here’s how the arbitrator’s award described what happened to Kneupper & Covey’s client, who was forced to try to pick up the pieces after Goodleap’s business partner Pink Energy went bankrupt:
“Parker lives at her home in Bryon, Georgia which she purchased on or about October 21, 2021. A salesperson employed by Pink Energy came to Parker’s home on November 8, 2021 for the purpose of attempting to sell her a solar energy system. This was an unsolicited visit as Parker knew nothing about solar energy power or systems.
The salesman spent around four (4) hours telling her of the many benefits of buying a solar energy system, including that it would eliminate most all her power bills, that she would receive a substantial rebate ($6,340.84) from Pink Energy, that there were substantial governmental incentives that would drastically reduce the cost of the system, that she could expect to pay only $35,000 to $40,000 for the system after receiving those incentives.
He further told Parker that Pink Energy would monitor the system and maintain it as per the warranties it offered. After several hours, Parker agreed to purchase the system.
The salesman then took out an iPad that had the contracts for the system. No hard copy was shown to Parker, she had no opportunity to review the contracts or control the iPad. The salesman skipped around to the various places that she was directed to sign.
On the same afternoon, the salesman assisted Parker in applying for financing for the system and he represented to her that the financing company was one of Pink Energy’s partners.”
The arbitrator found that Goodleap’s partner, Pink Energy, had damaged our client’s roof during the installation:
“During installation. Pink Energy substantially damaged the roof of Parker’s home causing leaking and damage to the interior of her home. She notified Goodleap of the damage and related problems by telephone on January 3, 2022. She was told to begin making payments to Goodleap and to contact Pink Energy about the problems. She contacted Pink Energy and Pink Energy disavowed any contractual warranties and did nothing to repair the roof damage.
Other issues arose. She did not receive the rebate or the services she had been promised; the system was not producing near the expected benefits that the salesman promised. She continued to contact Pink Energy regarding all these problems but received no assistance, and heard nothing more from Pink Energy until it filed for bankruptcy in October 2022.”
And importantly, the arbitrator found that Goodleap’s involvement was so extensive that they were liable for the actions of the solar installer, Pink Energy:
“The Solar Financing Agreement dated February 17, 2001 between Goodleap and Pink Energy has been thoroughly reviewed by the Arbitrator, as have the Georgia statutes and case law relating to agency. Applying that law and various provisions of the Solar Financing Agreement to the facts of this case, I find that Pink Energy was an agent of Goodleap in connection with the Parker contract with Pink Energy and also in connection with Parker’s loan agreement with Goodleap. The Agreement places in Goodleap control of many of Pink Energy’s actions with its potential customers including, but not limited to, timeframes relating to warranty support services, required manufacturer’s warranties, and workmanship warranties. It also gave Goodleap a broad right to terminate its relationship with Pink Energy. Additionally, Pink Energy’s salesman pushed financing of the solar system with Goodleap, as was done with Parker, for which Goodleap paid kickbacks to Pink Energy, as was the case in connection with Parker’s financing contract with Goodleap.”
Kneupper & Covey co-founder explains more about what the loss for Goodleap means to other solar victims, as well as the firm’s ongoing efforts to police bad actors in the solar industry, in this video: