Complaint Review: Sun-Tec

Sun Tec Solar Energy has over 3000 satisfied customers (and growing weekly) who not only praise our product, service, and attention to detail but they also continue to recommend us to friends, relatives, and neighbors. This is one of the reasons why Sun Tec Solar Energy is currently the number one solar company in the entire Southeast region of the United States for the past two years. We know that the continued success of our company depends on our ability to exceed the expectations of every customer. We also know that we cannot please everyone 100% but it does not mean that we don’t try.

The Ripoff Report forum is an excellent way for the consumer to identify a possible problem with a company before you do business with them. Many times when there is a real problem with a company it is systemic, ongoing, and without any resolution for the consumer. It can be a difficult position to be in as a consumer when a company either refuses to take care of a problem or ignores the issue altogether.

We believe that what really matters to a consumer is what a company does before a complaint is voiced, not after.

We welcome this opportunity to respond to this customer’s posting and present our side.

Mr. Paul J. Cline of St. Petersburg Florida, the person whose report we are responding to, purchased a SDHW (solar domestic hot water) system from us on June 28, 2013. The system he purchased also included, as part of a promotion at that time a 10 Watt SAF (solar attic fan) that was also installed at no additional charge. The SDHW system and SAF were installed and operational three days later on July 1, 2013.

 Mr. Paul J. Cline in his report has made several allegations that don’t mirror the facts as we are aware of them.

1. Mr. Cline seems to imply that the SDHW system he purchased was not a “Nothing Down” deal as he calls it, when in fact he did qualify for our zero down payment financing. His system was installed with no out of pocket money at all including no charge for permits which was an additional $303.40.
2. The savings Mr. Cline is seeing is exactly what can be expected with a SDHW system that has replaced an electric water heater. According to the 7 months of utility records Mr. Cline provided us, he has saved over 1100 kilowatts which gives him an averaged savings of 18% - 20% which equates to about $21 per month average savings. Our representative and our written agreement never promised a specific savings amount because each homeowner’s savings will vary according their energy use habits. The more hot water you use the more you will save and as the cost of electricity increases each year the savings will also increase. A SDHW system is an investment with a fixed monthly cost that each year will reap the benefits of using the sun’s free energy to heat water as opposed to spending an unknown amount of money for expensive electricity.
3. Mr. Cline states that his monthly payment is $60+ when in fact it less.
4. On the original work order our representative requested an angle bracket for the SDHW panel to insure the best placement on Mr. Cline’s roof. The angle bracket was installed due to the fact Mr. Cline’s roof has a great deal of shade from the trees surrounding his home. Mr. Cline alleges that he waited 8 months for us to fix his system. The actual procedure we initiated is based on the specific needs of each customer and in the case of Mr. Cline’s home the angle bracket was installed for the best placement of the panel but requires adjustment. When an angle bracket is installed our install technicians estimate the best angle to position the bracket at the time of installation. We then inform the customer that we will return in two to four weeks to check their system to insure the best performance of the SDHW system and if the angle bracket requires adjustment we will do so at that time.
   
   On our return visit to Mr. Cline’s home our install technicians determined that adjusting the panel angle bracket further would not gain any more performance because the trees surrounding Mr. Cline’s home were interfering with the sun’s position on the panel. We recommended and Mr. Cline accepted our offer to trim the trees that were interfering with the best performance of the SDHW panel.
   
   We hired at our expense a professional arborist for $400.00 to have the trees trimmed around Mr. Cline’s home. Once that was done the SDHW system was functioning well within design specifications and is producing plenty of hot water. Mr. Cline signed off on the tree trimming and even requested that the arborist return to his home to trim a few more branches to his liking and they did so without any cost to him.
5. When Mr. Cline purchased the SDHW system he was offered either the SAF or blown-in insulation as part of the promotion at that time. Mr. Cline chose the SAF.
6. Mr. Cline alleges that he attempted to contact our company president, in his words “virtually daily” and that he received no reply when in fact he was in contact on many occasions with the general manager, sales manager, and several other company employees who are all empowered to address all of Mr. Cline’s concerns. Our staff offered and followed through with the above listed responses. Mr. Cline was given every consideration and we tried to remedy his concerns with every resource at our disposal including spending money out of our pocket for trimming his trees.
7. Mr. Cline states that the SDHW system he purchased cost $13,000 when in fact the amount he paid was several thousand dollars less.

 It seems to us that Mr. Paul J. Cline has perhaps misinterpreted the facts to justify his posting here on Ripoff Report. We always believed that we would be able to satisfy Mr. Cline concerns and did everything we could as we would do for any customer.

Additionally we offered Mr. Cline R-30 blown-in insulation, at our expense because his home has the minimum insulation of R-10 we normally see in homes of its age and construction. R-30 Blown-in insulation could save Mr. Cline an additional 10% -20% (variable is based on the construction and shape of the roof and attic space) on his heating and cooling. This was something we were not obligated to offer but we did so to try and satisfy Mr. Cline’s energy use expense. He declined and stated to us that it was “only a band-aide solution”.

During two conversations with the general manager and the sales manager Mr. Cline stated that he was a SEO (Search Engine Optimization) expert and that if he didn’t get what he demanded he would use this expertise by posting “reports” everywhere on the internet similar to the one posted here on Ripoff Report.

His then demanded from our general manager that we remove the SDHW system and refund his money in full even though the system had been in place and in operation saving him money for 7 months. This was when he again implied that if he did not get what he demanded he would use his SEO skills to post “reports” on the internet.

Much to our dismay after he had already posted here on Ripoff Report he called and spoke to our sales manager and asked when we would be coming out to install the blown-in insulation that he had already refused. The sales manager was confused by the request because he was aware of the Ripoff Report posting and asked Mr. Cline if that meant that he was going to retract or modify his inaccurate posting about our company. Mr. Cline stated that not until after the blown-in insulation is installed would he consider modifying any statements he made online and that he may not do so even after the blown-in insulation was installed.

It was at this point we realized that there would be nothing we could do to satisfy Mr. Cline as he was demanding more than any company should be asked to do. And his demands were well outside of the product, warranty, service, installation, and financing agreements he signed and agreed to when he made the initial purchase.

As more and more Americans come to learn how solar power is our future, we pride ourselves on maintaining our goal of becoming the premier solar company in the state of Florida and the entire Southeast region of the United States. We cannot achieve that goal by ignoring our customer’s needs and in this case we believe we have far exceeded our commitment to finding a solution for Mr. Cline.

With all that being said, our company will not abandon Mr. Cline.  His solar product warranties, liability insurance, and any service requests he may have in the future will all stay in effect. We will continue to provide Mr. Cline the same consideration and level of service as we do all of our customers.