Featured Research · August 27, 2026
Solar Sales, Financing and What Happens After a Complaint
Michigan is testing how far responsibility extends after a solar sale. Separate actions in Texas and Arizona show why Sunrun customers should be paying attention.
Published August 27, 2026 by Solar Consumer Research. This story separates allegations, investigations, and settlements and links directly to the government records behind each section.
Three state actions, three different legal postures
A new Michigan solar lawsuit is worth watching if you have been following the complaints and investigations around Sunrun. Sunrun is not a defendant in the Michigan case. The connection is narrower: Michigan is examining what can happen after a solar sale is financed and consumers later report problems, while Texas and Arizona have taken separate actions involving Sunrun.
The cases should not be blended together. Michigan filed a lawsuit involving Climax Solar and finance companies. Texas is investigating Sunrun and other residential solar companies. Arizona reached a settlement with Sunrun and Vivint Solar. Each state record has its own facts, claims, and procedural status.
Michigan · Lawsuit filed July 15, 2026
Michigan is looking beyond the initial solar sale
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel sued Climax Solar, its owner, and several companies involved in financing Climax solar projects. The state complaint describes the alleged business model as “Pitch, Sign, Fund, Fail, Collect.”
Michigan alleges that Climax made representations about electric-bill savings, tax credits, and quick installation, then arranged financing while consumers signed documents during the sales process. The complaint says projects later stalled, failed, underperformed, lacked permission to operate, or were abandoned.
The scale alleged in the complaint is substantial. Records produced to date identify 1,689 Climax-originated Michigan loans totaling approximately $81.26 million in financed purchase amounts. The complaint says those loans included approximately $22.14 million in finance charges that it characterizes as hidden dealer, platform, or similar fees embedded in the financed price. Those figures are allegations and calculations presented by Michigan in the complaint; they have not been adjudicated as findings by the court.
The complaint goes further than the sales pitch. Michigan alleges that finance companies continued servicing, collecting, reporting, or enforcing some obligations after receiving notice of seller misconduct, nonperformance, disputed signatures, or cancellation problems. Those are allegations in a pending government complaint, not findings by this site.
See the Michigan solar complaint and enforcement resources →
Why the Michigan case matters
Michigan is examining conduct on both sides of the transaction: the alleged seller conduct and what happened after the resulting financial obligations were originated, funded, serviced, collected, reported, or enforced. That makes the case relevant to a broader residential-solar question: what responsibilities remain after a homeowner tells a company that the underlying sale or installation is disputed?
That does not connect Sunrun to the conduct alleged in Michigan. The Michigan case does not provide a basis to make that claim.
Texas · Investigation announced April 3, 2026
Texas is investigating Sunrun and other residential solar companies
The Texas Attorney General announced a broader residential-solar enforcement initiative and said the office issued Civil Investigative Demands to several companies, including Sunrun.
Texas says it is examining possible misrepresentations involving energy-bill savings, solar-system performance, equipment, and company terms and policies. The state also sought records concerning warranties, service plans, marketing materials, contracts, and how companies track changes in customers' electricity bills.
This is an investigation. It is not a finding that Sunrun violated the law.
Arizona · Consent agreement approved May 22, 2025
Arizona reached a $1.25 million settlement with Sunrun and Vivint Solar
The Arizona Attorney General reached a $1.25 million settlement with Sunrun and Vivint Solar over alleged deceptive solar sales practices. The court approved the stipulated consent agreement on May 22, 2025.
The agreement allocates $600,000 to civil penalties, $50,000 to the State for attorney's fees and costs, and $600,000 to consumer restitution. It also establishes a process for eligible complaints and permits forms of consumer relief that can include payments, credits, rate reductions, contract changes, cancellations, repairs, or other remedies under the agreement.
The agreement also addresses what happens after an Arizona consumer raises a problem. It requires a unique complaint number for tracking and requires commercially reasonable staffing efforts sufficient to provide a response within two business days. Read receipts and generic automated replies do not count as a response.
Sunrun and Vivint Solar denied the allegations. The agreement states that it resolves disputed claims and is not an admission of wrongdoing.
See the Arizona solar complaint and enforcement resources →
Read Arizona's Sunrun settlement information ↗
Read the stipulated consent agreement ↗
Michigan, Texas, and Arizona involve different companies, different allegations, and different stages of enforcement. They should not be treated as one case.
Taken together, the government records show state attorneys general examining more than the initial solar sales pitch. The records address sales representations, contracts, financing, system performance, service, and, in some instances, what companies do after a consumer reports that something has gone wrong.
What to watch next
The status of these matters can change. Michigan's lawsuit can produce court rulings, amended claims, or a settlement. Texas can close its investigation, take enforcement action, or announce no public action. Arizona's agreement can generate additional consumer-relief information or implementation updates. Solar Consumer Research will update this story when a primary source materially changes the record.
Primary sources and documents
Michigan Attorney General · July 15, 2026. Complaint against Climax Solar and finance defendants ↗
Texas Attorney General · April 3, 2026. Residential solar investigation announcement involving Sunrun ↗
Arizona Attorney General · May 22, 2025. Consumer settlement information ↗ · Stipulated consent agreement ↗
Continue the research
Sunrun investigations, enforcement, and documented cases →
Michigan solar consumer resources →
Texas solar consumer resources →
Arizona solar consumer resources →
Browse Solar Consumer Research stories and case trackers →
Read how Solar Consumer Research selects, verifies, and labels sources.