Sunlight Financial reviews
• last updated FEB 26, 2026Loading map...
The Verdict
Sunlight Financial is a lender you hire indirectly when your solar installer chooses them for financing, and once you sign, getting help becomes a serious problem. We found repeated accounts of customers stuck paying for broken or never-completed solar systems after installers went bankrupt or abandoned projects, while Sunlight kept demanding loan payments. In one case, a homeowner paid for panels that didn't produce a single watt of electricity for three years after the contractor disappeared, yet Sunlight sent the $30,000 balance to collections. The company also places liens on your home, and 21 reviewers described Sunlight blocking or delaying loan transfers when they tried to sell, even after being told transfers were allowed. One seller discovered mid-closing that Sunlight suddenly required a $15,000 minimum balance to transfer, a term nowhere in the original contract, and the company's complaint department never called back. Support is sparse. Multiple customers reported payment errors, surprise rate hikes from $255 to $325 per month with no warning, and weeks of unreturned calls when they tried to fix billing mistakes or get refund details.
If you're offered Sunlight Financial as part of a solar quote, ask your installer to use a different lender. You'll still owe the full loan balance even if the installer vanishes or the system never works, and getting help from Sunlight when problems arise has proven nearly impossible for too many homeowners.
Reviews That Shaped Our Verdict
hildegirl.rv hired a company to install a residential solar system in 2019 and discovered it never produced power for even one minute. She watched that installer later file for bankruptcy while the service technicians who showed up offered little useful help. To make matters worse, Sunlight placed a $30,000 charge on her husband’s credit and is pursuing payment for a system that never worked. She concluded the company was doing business with sketchy partners and left customers stranded. The lasting image: a nonfunctional system since 2019 plus a bankruptcy that still left them on the hook for $30,000.
About 1.5 months ago, abindizel discovered they had not one but two loans with the company after receiving a random letter in the mail. They contacted the firm and were told the issue would be escalated and the finance manager would call; three weeks of silence followed. When they called back, an employee named Ashley promised a manager would call within 24 hours — 72 hours later there was still no contact. Repeated follow-ups led to more escalations, a promised 48-hour callback that never arrived, and a later assurance that a manager had been reached and would call in 20 minutes; 72 hours after that, still nothing. They began calling daily and kept hearing the same 24-hour callback promise with no follow-through. Frustrated by the ongoing lack of communication, they plan to take the issue to the Better Business Bureau. The detail that sticks is the string of specific promises — including a 20‑minute callback — that were repeatedly unmet.
In March, rtancer was mid-process selling a suburban home and called Sunlight to transfer the solar loan to the buyer; Sunlight agreed to the transfer and supplied the paperwork to include in the sales contract. The sale was negotiated with that transfer built in, but when the buyer’s agent reached out in May to start the process Sunlight refused, citing a $15,000 minimum for loan transfers. rtancer checked the account and learned the outstanding balance was $13,600, then reviewed the seven-year-old contract with an attorney and found no clause requiring a $15,000 threshold. Repeated calls to Sunlight produced only the response that the file had been sent to the company’s "Complaint Department" and that direct contact with that team wasn’t allowed; the company promised a reply in seven days but 25 days passed without anyone getting back. What stands out is not the dollar amounts alone but that the transfer was blocked for a balance under $15,000 despite no such term in the original agreement, and the complaint process went silent while the home sale remained contingent on a resolution.
Platforms Monitored
Performance by Work Type
How We Got To Trust Score 47
No Red Flags
Unauthorized Activities
Passed screening
Misleading Claims
Passed screening
Background Check
Serving customers for 9 years
BBB Rating
Not BBB rated.
Review Patterns
Contractor License
License information could not be confirmed.
What You Can Expect
After selling a house with solar panels installed by Palmetto Solar, atoscano1305 filed a complaint with the BBB when Sunlight Financial refused to let the loan transfer to the buyer. They kept up every monthly payment and never defaulted, but Sunlight’s unwillingness to authorize the transfer left the sale tangled at a time they were trying to move closer to family. The reviewer points to page 6 of the contract, which allows the lender to authorize a loan transfer, and urges Sunlight to simply approve it so the buyers can assume the obligation. Frustration runs through the account: a completed home sale, on-time payments, and a contract clause—yet the lender’s inaction is creating significant hardship.
Owen began this process by asking his ex-girlfriend to call around for solar quotes; she contacted their local co-op, Withlacoochee River Electric Company, which steered them to Coronado Solar. What started as a search for a ground‑mounted system turned into a nearly $70,000 contract after a Coronado salesman named Gabriel pressed hard — he pushed until Owen, under great duress, caved and signed paperwork he didn’t fully agree with. Gabriel adjusted the terms slightly afterward, but the total cost still felt unreasonable. Coronado routed the financing through Sunlight Financial, a lender Owen found worrying because of a long list of consumer complaints. For months things seemed manageable until this month, when his monthly solar payment jumped from $255 to $325 with no advance notice. When he contacted customer service, staff answered rudely and asserted the company required 20–30% of the loan to keep the original rate — a demand that contradicted what Gabriel had promised during the sale. Gabriel had explained Owen could spread the federal tax credit over 20 years to cover more than $20,000 and that if he applied roughly $1,000 from the credit to principal when it arrived the 20
merzfamily had Solar Titan install solar panels on their home on 1/22. By 5/24 they discovered the system was still unfinished, yet the company was pressing for payment — effectively asking them to pay for two years for a non-working system. They called Solar Titan scammers and warned others to run, ending with a blunt "do not sign." The detail that lingers: months after installation the array wasn’t operational, but the installer still demanded payment — buyers should verify a system is fully functioning before handing over money.