Zero Energy Contracting reviews
• last updated FEB 26, 2026Loading map...
The Verdict
Zero Energy Contracting is not worth the risk. We analyzed hundreds of reviews and found systematic failures across installation quality, project completion, and honest sales conduct. One homeowner discovered electrical wiring left exposed throughout the house two years after the install—problems the crew created while moving a junction box without proper permits. Another waited over a year for panels that still weren't activated, after the company demanded an unexpected $3,000 mid-project and sent electricians who failed two city inspections. The data shows 107 reviewers citing poor value and 111 calling out sales misconduct, particularly around door-to-door pitches that misrepresent credit checks as "soft" inquiries when they're actually hard pulls that ding your score. Multiple customers report signing what they thought were rebate-qualification forms, only to discover they'd committed to $17,000 loans at 17.99% interest. Post-sale support scores a 2.7 out of 5, with 84 complaints about unfinished work, no-show appointments, and managers who threaten liens when customers refuse to sign completion certificates for incomplete jobs. One family spent four years chasing a rebate the company never submitted.
If you're exploring solar or insulation contractors in Southern California, cross Zero Energy off your list. The pattern of misleading sales tactics, permit violations, and abandoned projects is too consistent to overlook.
Reviews That Shaped Our Verdict
Piedad S. signed up for a residential solar install and more than a year later still doesn’t have a working system. She started with a firm price, but after an attic inspection the crew unexpectedly required extra work and tacked on an additional $3,000. Months of silence followed. When the company finally returned, they dispatched an electrician who wired cables incorrectly, and two separate inspections have already failed. She regretted doing business with them and ended the process with no live panels and repeated inspection failures — the mix of a surprise $3,000 charge, long delays, and improper wiring is what defines her experience.
Tim had a free, state-funded energy audit performed at his home by a separate company called Greenspire. A couple of days later a Zero Energy consultant came to the house to follow up. The consultant zipped through Zero Energy’s services and the available state and federal incentives, then began asking questions while filling out paperwork that Tim and his wife couldn’t see. When they asked whether the consultant had the Greenspire energy report he replied vaguely that it hadn’t been received or finalized—an early red flag because the presentation claimed to be based on the home’s usage. The consultant then asked Tim and his wife to sign forms so Zero Energy could “check” rebate and tax credit availability. When the wife pressed about conditions—income limits, eligibility rules—the consultant gave evasive answers and insisted he couldn’t verify anything without a signature. Tim clarified whether signing that form would also enroll them in Zero Energy’s services; after a pause the rep acknowledged that it would. They refused to sign. After the rep left, Tim and his wife reviewed the paperwork he had completed during the visit and discovered the application was nearly finished—just
Alex A. hired Zero Energy Contracting in March 2016 to make his home more energy efficient and ended up with a very different outcome: a hotter house, unfinished work, and an aggressive, intimidating run-in with a company representative. They discovered the crew had compacted insulation and blocked attic ventilation, which trapped heat and made indoor temperatures worse instead of better. The electrical panel remained uncovered, yet the company pushed hard for a signed certificate of completion for the HERO program before the job was finished. Jacob Card repeatedly phoned and emailed in a way the family found harassing—calling from a personal Las Vegas number, threatening a lien, and pressing them to sign—while an employee, Marlene Barboso, sent an unsolicited message about installing more panels. Alex also alleges the promised rebates and incentives never came through and claims the company kept federal tax credit benefits; he blames management decisions (naming Paul Hanson) for placing Card in that role. Beyond the workmanship and customer-service collapse, Alex warns of a pattern he encountered or heard about: subcontractors not being paid and legal headaches for homeowners. His
Platforms Monitored
Performance by Work Type
How We Got To Trust Score 35
Buyer Beware
Unauthorized Activities
2 reports
Misleading Claims
9 reports
Background Check
Serving customers for 14 years
Among the longest-standing installers in the market.
BBB Rating: NR
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
Danielle S. signed up with Zero Energy in May 2015 after being told a system would cut her electric bill in half. She ended up with only four panels and higher bills — the very setup the company had calculated would deliver a 50% reduction — plus a string of home repairs the crew performed before or during installation: asbestos removal, added insulation, repaired air-conditioning ducting, four vents in the garage, and a changed electrical box. Sales pressure pushed a false urgency about a 30% government incentive that she was warned would disappear if she didn’t act immediately; the incentive later remained available. About a year after installation, a rainstorm caused leaks where the panels sat; three weeks later the living-room wood floor buckled and lifted, leaving visible damage. When she called about the leaks and flooring, it took three weeks for anyone to show up and staff insisted her warranty had already expired. Requests for help about rising bills led to a runaround: she sent many bill photos to her representative only to be shuffled between departments with no answers or callbacks. She later discovered mechanical liens on the house because Zero Energy never paid the on
Alex A. hired Zero Energy Contracting in March 2016 to make his home more energy efficient and ended up with a very different outcome: a hotter house, unfinished work, and an aggressive, intimidating run-in with a company representative. They discovered the crew had compacted insulation and blocked attic ventilation, which trapped heat and made indoor temperatures worse instead of better. The electrical panel remained uncovered, yet the company pushed hard for a signed certificate of completion for the HERO program before the job was finished. Jacob Card repeatedly phoned and emailed in a way the family found harassing—calling from a personal Las Vegas number, threatening a lien, and pressing them to sign—while an employee, Marlene Barboso, sent an unsolicited message about installing more panels. Alex also alleges the promised rebates and incentives never came through and claims the company kept federal tax credit benefits; he blames management decisions (naming Paul Hanson) for placing Card in that role. Beyond the workmanship and customer-service collapse, Alex warns of a pattern he encountered or heard about: subcontractors not being paid and legal headaches for homeowners. His
Cori M. signed up four years ago for what was pitched as a one-day, whole-home energy upgrade — insulation in the attic and walls, sealed windows and doors, and solar panels that would eliminate energy bills after a short loan. She discovered quickly that the crew started work without pulling permits, and that the install was anything but tidy. On day one a family heirloom got broken; no one warned her, crews denied responsibility, and when she called the owner he yelled at her before reluctantly offering a small reimbursement. When the bank called to start the loan process, she refused to sign because the system wasn’t finished and there were no permits. The owner responded by berating her on the phone, accusing her of hurting his employees and threatening to file a lien — followed by 24 hours of harassing calls. To avoid court delays and a stalled project she authorized the loan, even though the work remained incomplete. Workmanship problems piled up. Installers first put panels on a section of roof that lacked proper structural support; they later moved the array to the other side, leaving visible patches in a relatively new roof and cracks in the ceiling. Getting city sign‑