Demand Construction reviews

Christopher had originally contracted with another company (AA) but cancelled that agreement and switched to Demand Construction after Pablo brought forward a competitive pricing package. He watched the transition unfold over a month and a half of back-and-forth: Pablo gathered details, answered questions, and kept working the lead instead of moving on. During the install the project hit supply snags with Tesla backup switches, yet Pablo stayed in contact and coordinated through the delays rather than disappearing. The job finished as a 27-panel REC array paired with two Tesla Powerwall 3 units for an 11.4 kW system. The steady involvement from Pablo — backed up by Telar, Juan, Haley and David — rebuilt trust during a bumpy process; what stood out was Pablo’s persistence, which turned a hesitant decision into a completed system.

In September 2024 bhalchander signed up with Demand Construction through a quote on EnergySage for a combined roofing and solar job on his home. He handed over 100% of the payment up front, expecting Demand to manage both the roof and the solar installation. Demand collected the money but later admitted they couldn’t do the roofing and subcontracted that part to another company. Project management then turned into a nightmare of delays and coordination, though the solar and roof work eventually finished. Despite receiving full payment from him, Demand never paid the roof installer, and now the roofer is pursuing him directly—threatening a lien on the house or legal action. He was shocked that a company like this appeared on EnergySage, and now faces the immediate problem of defending against the roofer’s claims despite having paid in full.

Michael bought a second solar system in November and expected a quick installation after meeting salesperson Jonathan Seber, but the job didn’t happen until May—and when it did the system was installed incorrectly and has never worked. He ended up with a bank of panels on his roof generating nothing while calls and emails went unanswered. He even offered to pay a second time to get the issue fixed, but the company ghosted him and refused to honor contracts or warranties. He discovered the company is facing lawsuits for not paying subcontractors, and learned that enforcing the contract would require arbitration in California. The image that lingers: dozens of panels doing nothing and a hard-to-enforce contract standing between him and a solution.

Al hired Demand Construction to install solar on his home and ended up nearly a year later still fighting a cascade of delays and missteps. He watched the project stall from the sales sweet spot into a slog: slow or nonexistent communication, materials listed as out of stock, late deliveries, installers scheduled who didn’t show, and an installation timetable that kept slipping. Permitting became a particular mess — plans required five or more revisions, inspections kept getting delayed because the paperwork and drawings were inaccurate, and the company didn’t even hold a valid business permit for work in his area at one point. He escalated concerns up to executives and the president, but nobody followed through. The only bright spot came from the outsourced crews who actually put the panels on the roof; thanks to them the array finally came online at about day 345. Even then, he couldn’t get Demand Construction to help set up monitoring or answer support questions despite repeated requests. Meanwhile a neighbor who hired a different firm after him was live in six to seven weeks, which drove home how far behind this project had fallen. The concrete takeaway: the installation itself

Sophia Lee contracted Demand Construction in July 2024 and paid $15,256.58 for a solar installation. She waited for work that never arrived; the company performed no installation activity and ignored repeated requests for a refund and to terminate the contract. Even a certified Final Notice mailed on November 11, 2025 failed to prompt a response. With no resolution, she filed formal complaints with the California Contractors State License Board and the California Attorney General’s Office for breach of contract and nonperformance. The most striking detail: a paid, signed $15,256.58 contract produced zero work, leaving her to seek recourse from regulators.

In March 2024 cdstewart865 entered into an agreement with Demand for a home solar install, expecting a three- to six-month turnaround for the project. They watched those timelines unravel as the company kept issuing revised completion dates that pushed work into 2025 — none of which came to pass. For long stretches their emails and phone calls went unanswered; only after threatening litigation did a crew finally show up this month to finish the physical installation. The hardware now sits on the roof but the system remains offline because Demand has not engaged on the final inspections and permission-to-operate. The tax credits that motivated the purchase are set to expire at year-end, so without inspection and sign-off those incentives — and much of the financial rationale for the project — risk being lost. The experience stands out to them as the most frustrating consumer interaction they’ve encountered.

vicmicsamlupe signed a contract in October 2024 for a rooftop solar system, and a year later—October 2025—found the panels physically installed but not producing power. They discovered a lien recorded against their home after the installer failed to pay its supplier, and for the second time the company has notified them it’s undergoing a leadership change. Attempts to reach anyone at the firm have hit a wall; they were told they’d get updates by November 1 but haven’t heard anything. Now they fear the company is collapsing and that they’ll be left with the lien on their property and the expense of hiring someone else to finish commissioning the system. A year earlier the company carried excellent reviews; whatever changed since then has turned that into this unresolved, one-star ordeal. The image that lingers is a finished-looking array on the roof that still won’t produce power—and a lien tied to the house.

TheWhiteKnighty2k began a solar-plus-battery project for their home in October 2024 and paid the first third when the company pulled the permit in November. When the permit finally cleared in January they paid the second installment and were told to wait because batteries were backordered. Panels and batteries eventually went up in June, but completion stalled: an inspector flagged a missing backup switch, which the installer needed to deliver so PG&E could finish the hookup. The company scheduled PG&E visits but repeatedly failed to deliver the switch, and every call from the homeowner returned the same answer — still waiting, no updates. In late August Greentech Renewables, the installer’s subcontractor, filed a lien on the property. By then the homeowner had already paid more than $20,000, yet the subcontractor remained unpaid. A request for a lien release got a promise to escalate to management, but no follow‑up arrived. Over the past few days calls began going straight to voicemail and emails and texts went unanswered. They found the company through EnergySage after interviewing multiple providers and now holds EnergySage partly responsible for not vetting companies better

Lucero had solar panels installed on her home about a year ago, but the system wasn’t turned on until June — and that’s when the problems began. She discovered the installer told her they no longer worked with the bank Palmetto lighreach and, under pressure, she agreed to switch to another lender; the company then had her sign a second contract with Sunligh. As a result she ended up with two separate loan agreements and two monthly payments to different banks. She has been trying to get the installer to cancel the Sunligh contract; the company keeps saying it’s “in process,” but nothing has been resolved. When she contacted the banks herself, they confirmed the installer still worked with Palmetto lighreach, which made her feel she had been misled. Meanwhile the panels aren’t delivering the promised savings and she continues to pay a high electric bill. She holds recordings and other evidence of how she was persuaded to sign the second contract, has brought an attorney on board, and invites others in the same situation to get in touch so they can consider joint action.