Understanding Equipment Ownership vs. Service Responsibility in Solar Agreements
May 18, 2026 No Comments
Read More » Your Duke Energy Florida bill keeps climbing in 2026. Your system may not be producing at the level you expected based on the sales presentation. Or a UCC-1 filing on your solar equipment just surfaced during your home sale or refinance. You are not alone — and there may be legal review options available depending on the facts. Submit your information below in under 60 seconds for a free, no-obligation intake. A St. Petersburg specialist will collect the basic facts so qualified legal counsel may review whether you may be eligible for a legal review.
St. Petersburg homeowners contact SCRC with patterns that come up over and over again. If any of these sound like your situation, the intake form above takes under a minute.
St. Petersburg sits in Duke Energy Florida territory — a different utility than neighboring Tampa, which is served by TECO. Duke Energy’s three-year rate settlement approved by the Florida Public Service Commission set base-rate increases of $59 million in 2026 plus approximately $71 million in solar-facility cost recovery the same year. On top of those base-rate adjustments, Duke customers have been paying storm-recovery surcharges for Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton — a $33+ monthly charge in early 2026 that began rolling off in February. Frustration with Duke pricing has reached the point that the City of St. Petersburg is, as of 2026, actively studying the feasibility of leaving Duke and forming its own municipal utility. For St. Pete homeowners sold solar on a promise of stable, lower energy costs, those promises increasingly do not match the Duke bill arriving each month.
St. Pete’s Gulf-side location means high humidity, intense UV, and constant salt-air exposure — conditions that accelerate degradation of solar panels, microinverters, and roof flashing. Coastal Pinellas homes are especially exposed. A common St. Petersburg complaint is a system that produced near sales-claim specifications in year one and has steadily declined since, while the lease or loan payment stays exactly the same.
Pinellas County took severe impacts from Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton in 2024. St. Petersburg, Gulfport, and the barrier-island beach communities experienced flooding, wind damage, and widespread roof damage. Solar systems were knocked offline across the area. When the installer is slow, unresponsive, or out of business, St. Pete homeowners are often paying twice: a solar payment for a system that isn’t producing, plus elevated Duke bills carrying storm-recovery surcharges from the same hurricane.
Florida Consumer Protections That May Apply to Your Solar Contract
Florida has consumer-protection statutes — including the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) — that a qualified attorney may review when evaluating a solar contract dispute. Federal protections that may also be relevant include the Truth in Lending Act and the FTC’s “Cooling-Off Rule” for door-to-door and in-home sales. SCRC does not provide legal advice or determine whether any of these apply to a specific case. The homeowner provides their documentation; documentation may be reviewed by qualified law firm partner Consumer Advocacy Law Group, which decides whether the facts may be a potential basis for a legal review.
St. Petersburg’s older housing stock, beach communities, and rapid retiree-driven growth have all made it a target for high-pressure door-to-door solar sales. Many contracts were sold on assumptions about net metering, tax credits, or “transferring to the buyer” that have not matched the homeowner’s actual experience when it came time to sell, refinance, or simply check the Duke bill.
Take this intake quiz to see whether your situation may qualify for legal review.
The homeowner submits the basic intake form on this page or calls 888-918-2083. No payment, no obligation, no commitment. The intake simply collects the basic facts of the situation.
The homeowner provides their solar contract, any finance or lease agreement, recent FPL bills, sales materials they still have (brochures, text messages, emails, recordings of the sales conversation if any), and any prior communications with the installer or finance company..
Documentation collected during intake may be reviewed by Consumer Advocacy Law Group, the independent law firm partner. SCRC does not perform legal analysis. The law firm decides whether the facts may be a potential fit for a legal review.
If a legal review path is offered, the homeowner is presented with the fixed-fee structure in writing before any decision. The homeowner decides whether to engage. There is no obligation at any prior step.
The decision to stop making payments on a solar lease, loan, or PPA must only be considered under the advice and representation of a qualified attorney. Stopping payments on your own —
before any legal review path is in place — can create additional problems, including default proceedings and credit-reporting issues. SCRC does not advise, suggest, or sanction the payment
or non-payment of any financial obligations.
Possibly. Florida and federal law typically give homeowners a 3-business-day right to cancel door-to-door and in-home sales contracts, but that window is not the only path. After 3 days, cancellation generally depends on the specific facts of the case — what was said during the sale, what the contract actually contains, how the system has performed, and whether the homeowner has experienced losses tied to the agreement. SCRC collects and organizes documentation from the homeowner so a qualified attorney with the law firm partner may review whether the situation may qualify for a legal review.
St. Petersburg ‘s climate — including intense UV, high humidity, salt air on the coast, and hurricane exposure — places ongoing stress on solar systems. When a system underperforms its sales- claim production estimate, when warranty claims go unanswered, or when storm damage isn’t addressed by the installer, those facts may be relevant. A qualified attorney may review whether non-performance and installer responsiveness raise issues that may be a potential basis for a legal review.
A UCC-1 filing is a notice giving the solar company or lender a security interest in the solar equipment — it is on the equipment, not on the home itself. In practice, however, it can complicate the title and lending process during a sale because buyers and mortgage lenders sometimes raise concerns. Many St. Petersburg homeowners come to SCRC specifically because a UCC-1 surfaced during a sale or refinance and they want documentation reviewed by qualified legal counsel before the closing date.
A bill that went up instead of down does not, by itself, automatically establish anything. But it is often a sign that what was represented during the sale — production estimates, savings claims, net-metering benefits, escalator clauses — may not match what the contract or the system actually delivers. A qualified attorney may review the gap between what was represented and what the contract actually says, and whether that gap may be a potential issue worth pursuing.
Often, yes — the contract itself is typically held by a finance company or lessor that is separate from the installer who put the panels on the roof. That is one reason installer bankruptcy is so frustrating for homeowners: the payments do not stop just because the installer disappeared. A qualified attorney may review whether installer non-performance and warranty issues may be a potential basis for relief depending on how the contract and finance agreement are structured.
No — and you should not stop payments on your own. The decision to stop making payments must only be considered under the advice and representation of a qualified attorney. Stopping payments without legal guidance can create additional problems, including credit reporting issues and default proceedings. SCRC’s intake step simply collects information; any decisions about payments are made later, with attorney guidance, only if the case moves forward.
The initial intake is free. If a legal review path is offered after the documentation is reviewed, SCRC works on a fixed-fee structure that is explained in full before the homeowner decides whether to engage. No homeowner is asked to commit financially until they have a clear, written breakdown of the fee.
Typically: the solar contract itself, any finance or lease agreement, recent Duke Energy Florida bills (ideally 12 months), any text messages, emails, brochures, or recordings from the sales process, and any communications with the installer or finance company. The homeowner provides the documentation; SCRC simply collects and organizes it so it may be reviewed by qualified law firm partner Consumer Advocacy Law Group.
No. SCRC is a marketing and intake service. SCRC does not provide legal advice and does not represent homeowners in legal matters. SCRC connects homeowners with Consumer Advocacy Law Group, an independent law firm partner that specializes in solar contract matters. Submitting an intake to SCRC does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The initial intake form takes under 60 seconds. After it is submitted, a St. Petersburg specialist follows up to collect the basic documentation. Documentation may then be reviewed by Consumer Advocacy Law Group. If the case may be a potential fit for legal review, the homeowner is presented with the fixed-fee structure and decides whether to engage. There is no obligation at any stage of the intake..
Takes under 60 seconds. Speak to a St. Petersburg specialist today.
Call: 888-918-2083
BBB A+ Rated • Fixed Fee • Partnered with Consumer Advocacy Law Group
