Tesla Energy reviews
• last updated FEB 26, 2026Loading map...
The Verdict
Tesla Energy is gambling with your home. We analyzed thousands of reviews and found a company that can't activate systems, miscalculates energy production, and leaves customers trapped in 20-year leases with higher bills than before they went solar. One homeowner paid $78.69 into their utility's credit bank but could offset only $6.16 of their bill, discovering too late that Tesla's sales pitch about "offsetting" power was a half-truth buried in fine print. Another waited nearly two years for Tesla to acknowledge full responsibility for a roof leak, then spent four more months waiting for a subcontractor who never called, racking up $2,067 in utility bills while the removed panels sat idle. The workmanship score (3.5) is the only metric above water, but post-sale support (2.2) and project management (2.5) scores reveal a company that disappears after install. We found 1,876 complaints about support versus 838 compliments, and in one theme covering 479 reviews about performance failures, only 1% were positive. The app-only communication model means you can't reach a human when your system fails, your roof leaks, or your bill doubles. Some reviewers report threatening legal action just to get a callback.
If you're willing to chase a company through apps and voicemail for years while paying two energy bills, Tesla offers a low up-front cost. But if you want a system that works as promised and a company that answers the phone when it doesn't, spend more elsewhere.
Reviews That Shaped Our Verdict
Patricia ended up with a damaged residential roof after a Tesla solar installation nearly two years ago; Tesla accepted responsibility twice and eventually removed the panels. The array has been offline since 4/15/2023, and she has spent four months waiting for the subcontractor to call and schedule a full roof replacement. That delay wiped out her solar production and left her with a PG&E bill for $2,067.52 — PG&E told her the system didn’t generate the expected energy while it was disconnected. She hesitated at first, hoping Tesla would make things right, but months of silence pushed her to escalate: she filed a complaint with the California Solar & Storage Association and reached out to the CALSSA ethics board without success, and she’s been advised to contact the Contractors State License Board. As of August 18, 2023 she still hadn’t heard back from Tesla and took to social media to try to force a resolution. The lasting image: panels down and off since April 15, 2023, and a four-figure utility bill hanging over the household while the company delays the roof repair.
Two years ago Kate M. and her husband signed on with Solar City, drawn by the environmental benefits and the promise that their normal utility bill would all but disappear, replaced by a predictable flat payment. Instead, their DWP bill stayed the same and they began paying $65 a month to Solar City on top of it — roughly $100 more every DWP billing cycle than before. They found themselves bounced between the two companies with nobody taking responsibility. Repeated messages to DWP’s dedicated solar line never reached a person, and regular DWP operators either told them they didn’t understand how solar works or suggested Solar City had ripped them off. DWP repeatedly refused to inspect the connection, even though other solar customers were initially not connected by the utility. Solar City answered by blaming higher household usage or asking them to trim a tree — a puzzling suggestion given that the tree’s shadow is off the house by 6 a.m. in summer and the family hasn’t added any power-hungry appliances. The panels are producing less than the output spelled out in the lease, which she believes contributes to the problem. Last spring Solar City said they wouldn’t consider any 0
Daniel L. had SolarCity panels for nearly four years, and what started as a misleading sales pitch escalated into a long, frustrating battle over a leaking roof and an alleged botched installation. When he filed a warranty claim for a leak, the company denied it; after months of back-and-forth he hired three independent roofing contractors, and they all found the same thing — poor design and a sag caused by improper installation — and refused to reroof with the SolarCity array in place. SolarCity brought in their insurer, and after more than three months a company rep arrived the same day as the insurance engineer. The rep and engineer acted like acquaintances, the engineer concluded the work didn’t meet snow-load standards, but the insurer pressed on what actual damage had occurred rather than taking responsibility. He wondered whether someone had to be hurt before the system would be corrected. Meanwhile six to eight roof tiles came loose in a recent storm; panels remained mounted over the damaged area despite earlier assurances they’d be removed, and that ongoing presence continued to damage the roof. A project manager named Jamal never crawled into the installation area to look
Platforms Monitored
Performance by Work Type
How We Got To Trust Score 38
Buyer Beware
Unauthorized Activities
19 reports
Misleading Claims
74 reports
Background Check
Serving customers for 18 years
Among the longest-standing installers in the market.
BBB Rating: F
Poor BBB standing. Significant complaints.
Natural Review Patterns
Reviews were posted naturally over time.
Contractor License
License information could not be confirmed.
What You Can Expect
Doug was on an EV electricity rate when Tesla installed solar at his home. About a year after the system went live he discovered a $4,000 NEM bill from PGE and traced it back to a single cause: Tesla had switched his account off the EV rate without telling him. The entire charge turned out to be driven by that unauthorized rate change. He explored legal options but found the likely cost of lawyers would dwarf any recovery, leaving him furious and stuck with the bill. The concrete takeaway for buyers: verify your utility rate and account settings right after an installer finishes work — an unnoticed change can turn into a four‑figure surprise.
Jeff discovered Tesla was easy to work with—until his home energy system stopped working. About 2½ years after installation his Powerwall 2 failed, and three weeks later the inverter went out too, leaving the entire system completely offline. He encountered opaque, ineffective support: no one could give specifics about his service request, confirm the status of the parts they claimed were “on order,” or provide a timeline for getting the system back up. He found their customer service to be among the worst he’s dealt with, with frequent brush-offs and no actionable information. Tesla told him the Powerwall 2 failure was a known issue, but when he pushed for replacements he learned they had no units available to install. He ended up with a 100% down system and no clear path to repair. The detail that stands out for prospective buyers: in his experience, a relatively early battery failure combined with unavailable replacement Powerwall 2 units left him stranded and uncertain about when — or if — service would restore his home system.
Elyse G had a long, trouble-free history with rooftop solar — SolarCity put panels on her 1,442‑square‑foot house in 2013, Tesla later took over the account, and nothing went wrong. In April 2024 she moved into a new house and asked Tesla to install a system there, expecting the installer’s site visit recommendation to be followed. She discovered a mismatch: the field rep had pointed to the sunniest side of the house for the array, but the crew actually mounted panels on the east side. When she questioned the lead installer, he replied that the designers had drawn it that way. The second problem landed in billing: she finances her system and consistently pays early each month (bill due the 14th), yet one month a payment processor allocated her whole payment to principal and nothing to interest without her authorization. After rounds with the billing team, she learned they would not or could not reapply the payment and now Tesla wants an extra $219.40 on top of what she already paid — an amount she insists stems from the company’s error. The lasting impression: a company that had once been reliable, but here left her with panels placed contrary to the initial plan and an unresolved,