A judge recently ruled in favor of a group of California residents who were affected by a residential power purchase agreement with Vivint Solar. One person named Gerrie Dekker filed a lawsuit claiming that the contract was unfair and included illegal fees. The lawsuit seeks to stop Vivint Solar from continuing these practices and to provide relief to those affected. The judge also ruled against Vivint Solar’s request to dismiss the case and found that the company’s recent acquisition did not change the issues in the lawsuit.
The judge ruled against Vivint Solar’s attempt to have the case dismissed and stated that the company’s acquisition by Sunrun did not solve the issues related to deceptive sales practices that were being raised by the plaintiff.
Judge William Alsup granted class certification for the first group of California consumers ensnared by Vivint Solar’s residential power purchase agreements. In her lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California, Plaintiff Gerrie Dekker alleges that the termination and transfer fee provisions in her 20-year solar contract are unlawful liquidated damages under California law. These provisions effectively require consumers to buy out the remainder of the contract—in most cases, tens of thousands of dollars. Dekker and her counsel, Matern Law Group, seek injunctive and declaratory relief to prevent Vivint Solar from enforcing these provisions on vulnerable consumers.
In a companion order, Alsup largely denied Vivint Solar’s motion for summary judgment—finding that Sunrun’s acquisition of Vivint Solar did not moot Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief as to deceptive sales practices.