A GoodLeap lawsuit in Texas typically rests on the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the federal Truth in Lending Act, and legal theories that hold the lender responsible for the conduct of the solar installer it financed. Texas consumers have filed dozens of complaints and several federal suits alleging forged signatures, hidden dealer fees, and false promises that solar panels would be free or covered by tax credits. Recovery is possible, but the loan contract’s mandatory arbitration clause shapes almost every case.
What Texas Borrowers Are Alleging
The complaints against GoodLeap in Texas follow a consistent pattern. Homeowners say salespeople from third-party installers told them the panels would be “free” or fully paid for by government programs, then handed over a tablet where the electronic signing process was controlled by the salesperson, scrolling past terms before the homeowner could read them. Some consumers say they never signed at all, and that signatures were forged and fake email addresses created in their names to push documents through DocuSign.1Texas Appleseed. Dimming the Benefits of Residential Solar in Texas
Other common allegations: overstated electricity savings, promises of federal tax credits the homeowner did not qualify for, and hidden “dealer fees” paid by GoodLeap to installers and folded into the loan principal without the borrower’s knowledge. These fees can inflate a loan by 20% to 35%.2SolarReviews. GoodLeap Solar Loans Elderly homeowners and non-native English speakers appear frequently in the complaint records.3Texas Appleseed. New Report Reveals Financial Damage Stemming From Solar Panel Fraud in Texas
The volume is real. A 2024 Texas Appleseed report identified GoodLeap and Solar Mosaic as the lenders most often named in Texas solar complaints, with roughly 195 complaints (about 10% of all solar panel complaints from Texans) specifically mentioning GoodLeap.1Texas Appleseed. Dimming the Benefits of Residential Solar in Texas At least 70 additional complaints had been filed with the Texas Attorney General’s office by the time CBS News investigated.4CBS News Texas. North Texas Woman Believes Late Stepmother Was Exploited by Solar Panel Contractor, Lender Between 2018 and 2023, solar-related complaints to the Texas Attorney General rose 818%, and complaints to the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation rose 576%. Of the complaints statewide, 45% involved false or misleading statements and 37% involved unsatisfactory service.
Legal Grounds a Texas Consumer Can Use
The primary state-law tool is the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, codified in Chapter 17 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code. The DTPA prohibits false, misleading, or deceptive business practices and allows a consumer to sue for damages. If the deception was knowing, the statute allows recovery of up to three times the actual damages.5Texas Attorney General. Consumer Rights
On the federal side, borrowers have sued under the Truth in Lending Act for failing to properly disclose dealer fees, along with claims for common-law fraud. The National Consumer Law Center’s October 2024 letter to the CFPB catalogued federal GoodLeap cases in the Southern District of Texas, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Middle and Southern Districts of Florida, and the Western District of Missouri.6National Consumer Law Center. TILA and E-Sign Letter to CFPB
Reaching GoodLeap for the Installer’s Conduct
GoodLeap does not sell or install solar panels; it finances purchases made through independent contractors. So the harder legal question is often how to hold the lender responsible for what the salesperson said or did. Two theories have worked.
The first is the federal FTC Holder Rule. GoodLeap’s contracts include the required Holder Rule notice, which preserves the borrower’s right to raise against the lender any claim the borrower could have raised against the seller. If the installer committed fraud, the borrower can assert those fraud claims directly against GoodLeap as the holder of the loan.4CBS News Texas. North Texas Woman Believes Late Stepmother Was Exploited by Solar Panel Contractor, Lender
The second is an agency theory: the installer acted as GoodLeap’s agent because GoodLeap controlled how it operated. In a Georgia arbitration, a former Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court found that Pink Energy, a now-bankrupt installer, acted as GoodLeap’s agent, pointing to a Solar Financing Agreement that gave GoodLeap control over warranty services, workmanship standards, and the power to terminate the partnership, along with financial incentives paid for steering customers toward GoodLeap financing. The result was cancellation of the consumer’s $90,000 loan, roughly $13,000 in damages, and an order that GoodLeap pay the consumer’s attorney fees.7Kneupper & Covey. GoodLeap Loses Key Solar Arbitration
The Arbitration Clause and How Some Plaintiffs Get Past It
GoodLeap loan agreements contain a mandatory arbitration clause that requires binding individual arbitration and prohibits class actions.8GovInfo. Bride v. GoodLeap, LLC A 2024 Center for Responsible Lending report described forced arbitration in the solar industry as opaque, noting that homeowners often lack representation, face non-refundable filing costs, and cannot appeal.9Center for Responsible Lending. The Shady Side of Solar Financing
There is a workaround that has succeeded when the borrower disputes ever signing. Courts have held that when a plaintiff claims the contract itself was never validly formed, because of a forged signature or similar defect, the arbitration clause cannot be enforced until a court decides whether an agreement exists. In Bride v. GoodLeap (W.D. Mo., 2024), a federal judge denied GoodLeap’s motion to compel arbitration and ordered an expedited jury trial on contract formation.8GovInfo. Bride v. GoodLeap, LLC In April 2026, the Western District of North Carolina reached the same conclusion in Montgomery v. GoodLeap, holding that “you can’t arbitrate a contract that may never have existed.”10NC Bankruptcy Expert. Montgomery v. GoodLeap – Arbitration Denied If you signed the contract, even under pressure, the arbitration clause will likely apply. If you did not sign, or believe your signature was forged, that is the fact pattern that keeps a case in court.
What GoodLeap Says in Response
GoodLeap has consistently argued that many complaints stem from the conduct of third-party salespeople and installers rather than from GoodLeap itself. Responding to the North Texas case involving an 80-year-old woman with dementia who was locked into a $60,000, 25-year contract with a total cost approaching $87,000, GoodLeap said it does not consider age in lending decisions and noted that the borrower had never filed a complaint during her lifetime. The company holds an A- rating with the Better Business Bureau.4CBS News Texas. North Texas Woman Believes Late Stepmother Was Exploited by Solar Panel Contractor, Lender
Filing a Complaint or Starting a Case in Texas
Two Texas agencies collect solar-related consumer complaints. The Texas Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division accepts complaints under the DTPA.5Texas Attorney General. Consumer Rights The Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner regulates credit transactions, including retailer-arranged financing, and can be reached at 800-538-1579.11Texas State Law Library. Consumer Protection Complaints to state agencies do not by themselves recover money, but they build the record advocates have used to press for enforcement, and Texas Appleseed has noted regulatory gaps that make private lawsuits the more direct route to relief.3Texas Appleseed. New Report Reveals Financial Damage Stemming From Solar Panel Fraud in Texas
If you are considering a lawsuit, a consumer attorney familiar with solar financing will look at several things: whether you actually signed the contract, whether the dealer fees were disclosed on your Truth in Lending disclosures, what the installer’s salesperson told you about savings and tax credits, and whether the installer is still in business or, like several GoodLeap partners, has since gone bankrupt. As of mid-2026, no federal agency had brought a formal enforcement action against GoodLeap.9Center for Responsible Lending. The Shady Side of Solar Financing The pressure on the company has come from state attorneys general elsewhere, private lawsuits, and individual arbitrations. For a Texas borrower, that means the case is yours to bring.
Outcomes to Expect
Results have varied. The Georgia arbitration produced full loan cancellation, damages, and fees.7Kneupper & Covey. GoodLeap Loses Key Solar Arbitration In a New Jersey federal case, a borrower alleged that GoodLeap partner Sunbeam Solar forged his signature on a 25-year, $142,948.38 loan when he thought he had agreed to $25,000; GoodLeap was dismissed from the case by stipulation, and the court entered a default judgment of $428,845.14 against Sunbeam Solar, including treble damages under New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act.12Justia. Shoukat v. GoodLeap, LLC et al. The pattern across cases is that consumers who can document forged signatures, undisclosed dealer fees, or specific false statements by installers have had traction; those with valid signatures on properly disclosed contracts have generally been steered into arbitration.