14000 Sample Pine Lane, Conroe, TX 77384
Prepared 2026-10-14
12 pre-install, 12 post-install, plus inverter production export
(385) 450-4509 · solardisclosure.io
The answer, in plain English
Before solar, this household paid an average of $322.92 a month for electricity. After solar, counting the loan payment, it pays $510.27 a month.
That is what this household pays on top of what it would have paid with no solar at all. The report traces every dollar of it to three causes:
- The rate plan you were switched to at signing credits the power you send to the grid at $0.03 per kilowatt-hour (kWh, the unit on your electric bill) while charging you $0.158 to buy it back after dark. Cost: $43.80 a month.
- The array produces 9,000 kWh a year, not the 18,500 kWh you were promised. Mature trees the installer did not map, and a design that clips output on a multi-facing roof. Cost: $95.22 a month.
- A dealer fee hidden in your loan raised the payment from the $240 quoted to $290. Cost: $50.00 a month, for 25 years, whether or not the panels work.
Each cause is proven separately below, so an attorney can plead them separately and a lender cannot blame the one it did not control.
Promised versus delivered
The sales proposal in one column, the measured result in the other. This table is the misrepresentation claim in its simplest form.
| What the proposal said | Promised | Measured | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual production | 18,500 kWh | 9,000 kWh | 9,500 kWh short (51%) |
| Monthly loan payment | $240.00 | $290.00 | $50.00 more, $15,000 over the term |
| Rate plan at signing | 1:1 net metering at $0.15 | $0.158 to buy, $0.03 credit to sell | Exports credited at one-fifth of retail |
| Electric bill after solar (monthly average) | $81.25 | $220.27 | $139.02 more |
| Total monthly cost with loan | $321.25 | $510.27 | $189.02 more |
| Change versus the pre-solar bill ($322.92) | $1.67 saved | $187.35 lost | $22,482.00 over ten years |
"Promised" is the system the proposal described, on the plan the proposal assumed. "Measured" is the system as built, on the plan the customer was put on, with the loan as written.
The rest of this report compares three versions of the same house, using the same 25,000 kWh of yearly electricity use in all three. What you were promised is the system the proposal described. Same panels, wrong rate plan keeps the promised panels but puts them on the rate plan the customer was switched to, so you can see what the plan alone costs. What you actually got is the real system, the real plan and the real loan.
How much power you used, how much the panels made, and how much you still bought
Month by month: the electricity the house used, the electricity the panels made, and the electricity you still had to buy from the utility. "Bought from the grid" is every kilowatt-hour the panels did not cover (nights, cloudy hours, and every hour the array fell short). In "what you actually got" it dominates every month.
Where you stand after ten years
Running total of money saved or lost compared with your bills before solar, month by month for ten years, with rates held flat and the loan payment fixed. The shaded area under "what you actually got" is the money lost: $22,482 at ten years. That shaded area is what the law calls economic injury (in Texas, under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, DTPA, the state consumer-protection law).
How $322.92 a month became $510.27
From the bill before solar to the bill plus loan now, one cause at a time. "Wrong rate plan" is the cost of the plan switch alone. "Panels made half of what was promised" is the cost of the shortfall. "Hidden dealer fee" is the loan markup. The plan is applied first, the shortfall second, the fee last.
| Step | $ / month | Running total |
|---|
Wrong rate plan = the promised system's grid purchases and sales re-priced on the plan the customer was switched to ($0.158 to buy, $0.03 credit to sell). Shortfall = the further bill increase when production falls from 18,500 to 9,000 kWh. Dealer fee = $290 minus $240.
Your July bill, three ways
The same month, reconstructed line by line from the ledger: the bill before solar, the bill the proposal implied, and the bill this household actually receives. July is the peak cooling month and the largest gap of the year.
July delivered: $161.79 more than before solar and $228.17 more than the proposal implied. The twelve-month ledgers below carry every other month.
The three versions side by side
| What you were promised | Same panels, wrong rate plan | What you actually got |
|---|
The month-by-month numbers behind every chart
The complete monthly data each chart is drawn from. "Saved or (lost)" is your bill before solar minus what you pay now (bill plus loan); a number in parentheses is money lost.
Model inputs: 25,000 kWh/yr consumption on a Houston cooling-dominant monthly profile; production on a Houston solar (PV, photovoltaic) profile; 80% of production used inside the house as it is made ("self-consumption") in S1 and S2, 90% in S3 (a 9,000 kWh array rarely makes more than the house is using at that moment). S1: $0.15 import and export (1:1). S2: $0.17 import, $0.03 export. S3: $0.158 import, $0.03 export. Loan $240/mo (S1, S2), $290/mo (S3). All-in rates; no separate fixed charge. Projections hold rates flat and the loan fixed.
Texas legal grounding
How the "what you actually got" numbers map to the laws a Texas consumer attorney would plead. Written for the attorney; your copy of the report carries these pages so you do not have to explain the numbers twice.
Unconscionable Action
Texas Business and Commerce Code (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code) Sec. 17.50(a)(3); defined at Sec. 17.45(5)An unconscionable action takes advantage of a consumer's lack of knowledge, ability, experience or capacity to a grossly unfair degree. The mathematical delta is the measure of that degree. A product sold to lower the cost of electricity raised it from $322.92 to $510.27 per month, a 58% increase, in every month of the year, with no month in which the household was better off.
The waterfall isolates the two components the consumer had no capacity to evaluate at signing: a plan placement that raised the effective cost of the energy the array displaces (+$43.80/mo) and a dealer fee buried in the loan principal (+$50.00/mo, $15,000 over the loan term, owed whether or not a single panel works). The ten-year cumulative injury of $22,482.00 against a $3,875 annual baseline is the gross disparity between value received and consideration paid.
Misrepresentation of Goods and Characteristics
Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Sec. 17.46(b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(24); damages at Sec. 17.50(b)(1)The sale represented a system with a characteristic (18,500 kWh annual yield) and a benefit (a lower electric bill) the delivered system does not possess. The inverter export joined to the meter measures 9,000 kWh against 18,500 kWh represented: a 9,500 kWh annual shortfall, 51% of the promise, present in all twelve months of the ledger.
That gap supports (b)(5) (goods represented to have benefits they do not have) and (b)(7) (goods represented to be of a particular standard or quality when they are of another). Because the shortfall traces to unmapped shading and faulty design, conditions knowable to the seller through a site survey the consumer could not perform, it also supports (b)(24) (failure to disclose known information to induce the transaction). Economic damages are the Delta table; if the conduct was committed knowingly, up to three times economic damages may be awarded, which on the ten-year figure is $67,446.00.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Holder Rule
16 C.F.R. (Code of Federal Regulations) Sec. 433.2Because the solar loan was arranged by the seller to finance this sale, the note carries the required Holder notice and the lender stands in the seller's shoes, subject to every claim and defense the consumer could assert against the installer, up to the amounts paid under the loan. This ledger converts those claims into a figure the lender cannot credibly dispute: a system that cost the household $2,248.20 per year more than no system at all, financed by a note inflated by a fee the lender's own paperwork concealed. The report does not cancel a loan; counsel does, by negotiation or suit. What the report does is put a quantified, month-by-month claim in the lender's hands, with its exposure growing by $187.35 every month the loan remains in force, so that cancelling the note and refunding payments becomes the lender's cheapest option on the numbers. Whether a given lender takes that option is a decision for the lender and for counsel.
Data Consulting Disclaimer
This report provides technical data-engineering summaries and economic modeling prepared by a data consultant. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client relationship, and does not constitute a legal opinion on liability, the applicability of any statute or rule, or the merits of any claim. The three scenarios are illustrative models built on stated assumptions; the monthly and hourly profiles are modeled shapes adopted as ground truth for this exhibit, not measurements from a specific property. Statutory and regulatory references are provided for orientation and must be verified by licensed Texas counsel against current law before use in any demand, petition or filing. Any conclusion about a specific homeowner requires that homeowner's actual interval data, production data, contracts and bills.
What the report includes, and what we need from you
1. You send
- 12 months of electric bills from before the install, and every bill since
- Your utility account login, or a Green Button download, so we can pull hour-by-hour usage
- A production history exported from your own monitoring account (we show you how)
- The sales proposal, the signed contract, and the loan agreement
- Any texts or emails where savings were promised
2. We do
- Join your meter data to your inverter data, hour by hour, for every month since install
- Rebuild your pre-solar baseline from your own bills, weather-adjusted
- Price every kilowatt-hour on the plan you are actually on and on the plan you were promised
- Pull the dealer fee out of the loan and cost it over the term
- Separate the three causes so each can be pleaded on its own
3. You receive
- This report, for your property, with your numbers
- The twelve-month ledger as a spreadsheet, every formula live
- A cost-difference summary (monthly, 5-year, 10-year, loan term) you can share with an attorney
- A lender-ready summary for the Holder Rule claim
- A plain-English one-page verdict you can forward to anyone
$450 to document a $22,482 ten-year claim, and up to $67,446 if a court awards three times economic damages. Delivered within five business days of receiving your documents. If the data shows your system is performing as sold, the report says so; you will know either way.