California Energy Research reviews

In 2013, Ida C., nearing retirement on a fixed income, answered a sweepstakes pitch hoping to cut future electric bills by going solar. She initially signed with Sungate, canceled within the three-day rescission period because she felt uneasy, then later agreed to proceed after a promotional IVD discount reduced the price to $18,599 (without the panel upgrade) and she was promised a $5,579 tax credit. The system went up that year, and three months after installation Sungate called offering more panels; she declined and chose to monitor performance first. Instead of seeing falling electricity costs, she watched bills climb — by 12/14/2015–2/12/2016 her two-month bill reached $1,035, an amount she cannot absorb in retirement. When she sought help, Sungate had already been absorbed by California Energy Research, and attempts to reach or log into the successor’s website hit redirects and error pages while unwanted sales calls continue. Ida has asked for direct contact from California Energy Research and is preparing complaints to the BBB, the Department of Consumer Affairs, and a local Crime Busters reporter — but the clearest takeaway for her is this concrete number: a $1,035 winter,

Gus K. had a solar system installed on his home just over a year ago and discovered he'd overpaid and wasn't happy with the performance. Yesterday a corporate Senior Director of Marketing called and offered to add three to four panels "for no capital" — which he and his wife understood as free. The next day their local representative, Jim, showed up and began talking about adding five or more panels. When he mentioned the corporate promise, Jim phoned someone who immediately said, "We don't do that!" and told Jim he'd "check the recorded tapes," a comment that implied he was mistaken or the corporate caller had been wrong. Frustrated, he refused to pay for additional panels. As Jim left, he offered $200 for a neighbor referral — an offer he found almost laughable after the contradictory promises. After more than a year of underwhelming results and what he sees as misleading commitments, he regrets choosing Sungate; the conflicting guarantees and the recorded-tape implication are the details he warns future buyers to watch for.

Leah had a $17,000 financed solar installation put on her home a year ago and discovered it has been nothing short of a nightmare. She and her husband reached out to the company repeatedly; the installer sent at least three different technicians to the house, but none fixed the problems. The most recent visitor, a man named Jim who came about two weeks ago, looked baffled by the workmanship and promised to escalate the issue to management — and then nothing happened, no follow-up calls or real solutions. Frustrated, Leah started researching how to file a complaint with the BBB and began warning friends, neighbors and coworkers not to work with the company. Financially, she ended up with far less than she was sold: after spending $17k, her electric bill dropped only about $20 a month instead of the promised $50 or less, and she’s still paying roughly $150–$200 a month. On top of the poor performance, the company keeps calling them with sales pitches and apparently doesn’t keep accurate customer records. Her clearest takeaway: after a year and thousands financed, the system barely reduced monthly bills and the company didn’t follow through when problems arose — a caution to anyone m=

Kathryn C. connected with Sungate after a marketing outreach, but she ended up choosing them because the salesperson who came to the house was unusually well informed and persuasive — he was the sole reason they signed on. Her South Bay system installation finished without technical problems, and customer service stayed responsive; when she called, she connected quickly to someone who could help. She docked one star because the installation crew looked and acted slightly disheveled, even though they did a competent job. In an October 7, 2014 update she confirmed the system continued to run without issues and that Sungate answered her calls promptly. A practical takeaway she passed along for local buyers: switch SoCal Edison billing from the tiered plan to time-of-use billing to capture the most savings from solar.

Chuck hired American Home Craft in 2001 for a Texcote “lifetime” paint job on his house and paid $11,568 for what he expected to be high-quality, long-lasting work. He discovered the company was rebranding around the same time — American Home Craft disappearing and reemerging as Sungate Solar — and that change would later complicate warranty claims. After the crew finished, he walked the property with his wife and cataloged a string of workmanship problems in a November 17, 2001 letter to Jack Butler: light fixtures had been removed and not replaced (one with broken glass found by the fence), backyard floodlights were pulled with primer coating the lamp sockets, house numbers sat on a wood retainer covered in overspray, empty paint and primer cans were left at the side of the house, a hose hanger ended up in the bushes instead of remounted, and multiple areas showed overspray that good preparation could have avoided. He also found several stucco cracks that had been primed and Texcoted without the promised flex patching; after he complained to Duane, some rotten porch railing pickets were replaced and some cracks were repaired, but a corner and other cracks remained unaddressed. He

Chuck N. got talked into a solar install a few years ago: a small 1.5 kW system made up of six 255-watt panels that was initially quoted around $40,000 but, after discounts and financing pitches, ended up costing him roughly $16,000. The sales rep offered a discount because the company thought his yard would make good advertising — a sign was promised but never showed up. He signed on with a no-interest, no-payments-for-one-year financing arrangement, then paid the balance early to avoid the large back-interest that would have kicked in afterward. The installation itself had mixed results. Permits moved through without issue, and when he asked for the panels to be angled for better efficiency the crew pushed back at first but ultimately complied. The inverter and exterior conduit looked professional — the pipe was painted to match the house — and those parts of the job went well. The network hub that was supposed to enable system monitoring, however, never worked, so he has been unable to track performance. Technicians returned two or three times to finish or fix items after the initial install, and the company checked in once afterward. He complained about the nonfunctional hub,

Shane K. hired the company to install solar for his elderly parents, and an early mistake set the tone: a sales rep accidentally left behind paperwork that revealed the installation documents carried different numbers than the contract his parents had signed. He discovered the discrepancy, tried to get answers, and ran into a wall — calls went unanswered, staff accused him of lying, refused to look at the paperwork he offered, and even insisted he couldn’t read what was in front of him. Because installers had already started, the family pushed forward, and that decision turned sour. What followed were months of installation errors, repeated failed inspections, and extra corrective work. The company tried to blame the city inspector, but that same inspector, standing with the installer during the final visit, told them he had not encountered so many installation omissions and mistakes in his 20-plus years. On top of that, installers showed up without notice and gave themselves access to the property. Shane ended up holding the misplaced paperwork that first exposed the mismatch and watched the inspector’s blunt assessment underline how badly the job had been handled. For prospective

Nick pursued a solar install to shrink a pricey PG&E bill, but the moment that defines the whole experience came when he found a small box in his garage and later discovered his panels had never been turned on — which produced a nearly $4,000 true‑up. He had accepted a firm price he couldn’t exceed, understood the six‑panel system would cut his monthly electric costs, and even halted work when a surprise change order demanded several thousand dollars. After a call with a rep, the crew agreed to make the changes at no extra charge, and he was so relieved he joked about flying a Sungate flag beneath his American flag. Before the crew finished, an installer asked him to sign the completion form; trusting the crew, he signed and was told the monitored system was up and running. A couple of weeks later he found the monitoring unit boxed in his garage; Sungate told him a tech had to install it and that someone would call, but no one ever did. For months his PG&E bill ran about $40 — which felt like big savings — until almost a year later a true‑up arrived for roughly $4,000 and PG&E confirmed the panels had never been activated. Sungate blamed him for not checking the monitor that hadn’t

Kay H. went into a solar contract with Sungate and found the team pleasant, but she discovered the promised drop in energy costs never materialized. Her latest SDGE bill still came in at $282 while her monthly solar payment is $550, so she ended up paying about $268 more each month. With 33 payments remaining, she faces a long stretch of higher outflow instead of the savings she expected.