First meeting with company rep, and he offered an incentive of a Load Control, then chose to bill me $1200 for the item. I challenged that, and the company sent out an inferior Load Control without a UL seal. The electrician refused to use it and I demanded a quality product. 7/24/08
The contract was signed and I was billed for sales taxes. I contacted the State and they stated there are no sales taxes on solar energy materials. This law had been in effect for a year. On calling the company, they quibbled and stated the State is constantly making changes. The tax was removed with pressure.
Work begn in early Oct.'08 with three different crews. The first two were fired by Mr. Baxter for his reasons. I inquired why the solar panels were layed flat on a flat roof and not angled to gain the maximum solar and was told the horizontal was maximum.in the second crew an electrical engineer accompanied the crew and he inquired why I'm not maximizing the sun's energy. I again told Baxter I wanted the panels at the correct angle to maximize the benefit. Again, he stated the horizontal position was maximum. However, when we submitted the request for the utility rebate which was initialized promised in the contract at $12,400, Baxter reduced the rebate request by 10% because the panels were not at the maximum angle for solar. The utility company requires the dealer to execute an Installation and Warranty Certification Form certifying that the skystem meets the requirements specified in the agreement. No such copy has been submitted to the owner.
Baxter threatened a lien on our home in early November despite the fact we had paid him 3/4 of the total amount, and the job was not done, nor had it been inspected by the county or the utility company.
Baxter screamed that the workmanship was 100% complete and adequate and unless the full amount was paid there would be no inspections.By now, Baxter had hired Acosta Electrical to complete the electrical work. Their employees and owners were far more understanding and agreed in the principle that the work was not completed until the final inspection. Baxter was told that when the county and utility company completed their inspection he would be paid. The county inspector arrived in mid-December and had to make three visits because of negligence in the installation. Corrections were made. I stated that unless the solar system was running, I would have no leverage on Baxter if there were further problems discovered by the utility company, and the trust level with him was eroded.
A call came on 12/21 from a staff member inquiring of my concerns. I had not received any stated warranty on the solar panels. There had been no request submitted to the utility company to inspect the workmanship.in that Baxter had failed to fulfill the work requested, and thus the rebate from the utility company would be reduced in excess of $1000, I stated that either he correct the work, or reduce the remaining bill by the amount lost from the stated rebate of the original contract. (An e-mail was sent a Ms. Linda Hardy from the firm with a basic warranty from the manufacturer of the solar panels without any specificity to this house) Another e-mail was sent by Ms. Hardy stating that the utility company had now been contacted to do an inspection.
On 12/22 Baxter contracted with Dar-Liens, a legal firm to draw up a preliminary 20 day lien notice which was received 12/23. A para-legal, Susan Beyette, drew up the document I responded to he law firm was contacted that same day and spoke to Mr. Dale Sheen. I was requested to send any documentation and a statement of the grievances against Baxter and his company and a history of the ongoing dispute. Baxter is allegedly not licensed to do this work, but works under another's license and has never produced on request proof of his license or bonding.
Baxter wrote a letter to us filled with mendacity and threats, untruths and vitrolic abuse on 12/22 to which no response was deemed worthy.
0 comments