Consumer complaint received 2022-02-10
Company: Dividend Finance Inc.
State: GA
Product: Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan
Sub-product: Installment loan
Issue: Getting the loan

Complaint:
To the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Greetings, I am writing this letter as a result of being sold a solar power system by XXXX XXXX ( and financed by Dividend Finance ) for my house in a manner that after further reflection and investigation I believe to be misleading and predatory. In XX/XX/XXXX I followed an online advertisement for home solar systems with XXXX down payment. I was skeptical but figured I would see what they had to say for themselves. I was quickly called and a salesman was sent to my home the next day. Throughout the sales process I had lingering doubts that I should have listened to, but all my questions and concerns were answered, although I would later discover often in misleading fashion. 
The sales presentation included a large percentage of the overall sale being reimbursed through the federal solar tax credit. I checked and saw that the basics were correct, that it would cover XXXX percent of the total cost and that it could be applied for even if a loan were taken for the system. All of this tracked so I set it aside and tried to understand all the paperwork and numbers involved. The loan itself was designed with this tax credit as part of the process the loan would begin at a lower monthly rate calculated by taking the tax credit as a balloon payment within the first XXXX months. Without this, the monthly payments would increase substantially. When this topic came up, I was asked whether I paid taxes. I explained that as a stay at home dad, we lived off my wifes income as an elementary school teacher, and we had XXXX small children ; so we filed taxes certainly but we always got refunds. I asked specifically whether this tax incentive would apply to our situation and was assured it would. Further, it was presented as though this would be a payment from the government which I would then pay forward on to the loan. I was led to believe this would function the same as child tax credits or the first time home buyers credit I received when buying our first home. It was not until XXXX weeks later after the new year that I sat down to begin mentally preparing for tax season that I discovered how I had been misled. 
Rather than a refund credit, I discovered that the solar credit only applies to reduce tax liabilities, which is to say taxes owed could be reduced by this amount. I would not receive the credit as a refund and therefore would not be able to pay this forward to the loan. As I learned what tax liabilities means, I checked my prior tax returns and confirmed that in our current financial situation, we have no liability, therefore the solar credit could be claimed but would provide no actual value. After learning this, I went back to the paperwork from the solar purchase and discovered that there was indeed fine print legalese that provided legal coverage for the company which claimed they are not a tax service and do not provide tax advice. Despite this, the salesman did provide this sort of advice when asked for clarification. Given a full understanding of the tax credit, no reasonable person would conclude that my situation ( low income bracket with XXXX dependents ) would qualify for the solar credit. The presentation of ideas in the sales pitch and in the loan itself is misleading to make it seem as though this credit is money that the government will provide to help fund the system, which is simply untrue. Instead, as it is written, this tax credit only serves to aid those in higher tax brackets and does not provide any funds to be paid forward to the lender. 
After installation of the system, I also discovered that I had been misled on the amount of power that the system would generate. Rounding for simplicity, this is the presentation I was given : the loan payment ( lowered by the tax credit ) would be XXXX XXXXXXXX and the system would generate an average of XXXX XXXXXXXX of power. The net payment would therefore be {$130.00}. The reality is much different. Given that the tax credit is worthless to my situation, the payment will instead be $ XXXX, and so far the system has only been generating around $ XXXX in power, meaning my cost would be above {$300.00}, more than double my expected net payment ( granted winter production is lower, but even still ). After seeing these numbers develop, I looked over the sales documentation once more and discovered that what I was told in the presentation did not match the numbers in the actual document, now that I understood more acutely the precise cost of power per kilowatt-hour. The printed estimate when calculated by the cost I pay for power ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) was less than {$900.00} annual, meaning less than XXXX XXXXXXXX average, approximately half what I was told by the salesman in the visual presentation ( which claimed {$140.00} average monthly production ). By this calculation therefore my monthly net payment would average at {$300.00}, considerably more than the {$130.00} I had planned to budget. 
As I discovered the problems with the tax credit I attempted to contact the solar company, initially the customer service rep assigned to my case told me to speak to the salesman, who in turn did not respond. As a result, I contacted the finance company, Dividend Finance, and after XXXX long emails and XXXX weeks of waiting, I finally got in contact with their complaints department. Although I was variously shamed over the phone by the representative for the fact that I had signed these documents and not caught these points until it was too late, we did settle on a proposed compromise : the battery system ( which I have come to realize is nearly worthless and very expensive ) could be taken back by the solar company and the amount of refund would cover the difference of the tax credit. This would keep my payment at the initial level of {$270.00}, although now that I have understood the numbers better, the misleading $ 140 monthly is unlikely if not impossible, but even so the final average net cost would be $ 200 monthly, still XXXX XXXX more than I expected, but potentially doable. I have contacted the solar company again to indicate that I am filing this complaint with the finance company and again have not received any reply. 
Having heard nothing back from either the solar company or the finance company, I filed a complaint with the XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ) on XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX. The solar company, XXXX XXXX, responded to my complaint with a polite but vague reply on Monday morning indicating a desire to rectify the situation but offering no actual plans. The representative from the solar company reached out later that afternoon, approx XXXX pm, with a phone message and short email. I missed the call as I was preparing dinner for my family but immediately responded to the email and clarified my request to have the battery system returned and refunded to cover the loss of the tax credit. I did not receive a reply the next day, so Wednesday, XX/XX/XXXX I emailed the representative again asking for a timely response as the XXXX only gives XXXX days for the consumer to reply to the business, accepting or rejecting their message. The representative responded that the company was not willing to accept this compromise and reminded me of the rebate the company had provided which covers the first year of payments. My issue, however, is not with the introductory payments, but what happens to them after the loan re-amortizes and the rate goes up for the remaining XXXX years of the loan. Further, my central issue, that I had been purposefully misled in the sale of the system, was never acknowledged or even discussed. I also made it clear that I would take up further action with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and XXXX Attorney General, as well as contact news agencies. To this message I received no reply. 
Accordingly, I rejected the company reply to maintain my complaint with the XXXX. It should be noted that the XXXX system itself appears to preference the company over the consumer. The company is given XXXX days to reply to the complaint, but the consumer is only given XXXX  days once the reply has been made to accept or reject it. If the reply is accepted then the complaint is closed. The solar rep when contacting me said she would reach out in another week if she hadnt heard back from me, which would mean that the case had already expired and closed. The reply of the company was calculated to meet the requirements of the XXXX and give generic platitudes, but avoided any actual plan of action, relying either on an initial feeling of goodwill to accept the vague reply or let the timer run out. Indeed, I allowed myself to relax some in the sale process when I had seen that the company had a high XXXX rating, but now I realize that they are just very good at avoiding damaging complaints, something the XXXX system appears to allow. 
Given that the deceptive numbers and ideas were all woven into the sales presentation, I believe that my situation is not unique or an outlier, but rather represents a core business strategy built on selling high value systems on misleading credit and loan terms. Initially, I was impressed with how fast the company worked to install the system, but in hindsight I believe this emphasis on fast install is to ensure that customers do not have adequate time to reconsider the purchase and research the various financing issues involved, particularly the highly misleading tax credit. While the legal disclaimers tucked variously in fine print cover the company legally, I believe I was purposefully and repeatedly misled on key aspects of the financing process as well as the performance of the system itself. This process and the many weeks I have spent anguishing over these issues has caused me significant personal stress and anxiety. I am left with the options of having a loan payment for a significant portion of our limited household income for decades, or defaulting on the loan and losing the high credit score I have diligently earned over my adult life. 
As I have been learning of the deception involved in this process, I have looked online to see if there are news articles warning of this scam, and I was somewhat surprised to find very few on the subject. Given the way in which this company sells their systems, and the misleading presentation of ideas involved, I expect there are many more people out there in similar situations. Even while I was caught by fine print legalese which protects the company from legal liability for their deceptions, the public must be made aware of this situation so that they can detect the lies when they encounter them. Given the manner in which the loan was offered and presented, I believe it fits the federal definition for predatory lending, as it includes a highly misleading balloon payment based on a tax incentive program that does not refund the customer that causes a major increase in the cost of the system and associated payments. Further, the sales process itself, the extensive fine print, and speed of financing and installation all point towards an awareness by the company that what it is doing is misleading and in essence traps their customers into systems that they can not reasonable afford ( while using an upfront rebate as a XXXX to quiet customers when they discover the problem ). Never once during the sales process was I advised by the salesman to slow down and seek outside counsel ( such as an attorney or accountant ) even if the many pages of documents included such warnings ; instead all my concerns were smoothed over and explained away. If the salesman had been honest about the tax credit, perhaps we could have designed a smaller more affordable system, but never once was this presented as an option. In essence, he sold me a loaded XXXX when I could really only afford an entry-level XXXX. Further, the sales process also preyed upon my desire to do my part to improve our ecological impact and energy independence. Slogans like are you ready to own your own power? and the sort were offered to spur on the sale and gloss over issues that might have led me to realize the misleading aspects of the purchase. I should have recognized all of this and indeed had a suspicion that something wasnt right, but I could never quite discern what the problem was until it was too late to cancel. All of this has had a very negative personal impact on me and produced a great deal of anxiety, turning it over in my head repeatedly and blaming myself for not being smarter about it all. 
Ultimately, this situation has caused me considerable distress and will likely hurt my credit score as I doubt that a compromise with the solar company can be reached leading to default on the loan. Indeed, after filing the XXXX complaint and pushing the issue, I was told as much, that no compromise would be offered and that the rebate should give me peace of mind about the loan payments. As I am likely going to default mainly on the principle of the deceptions by which the loan was established, the solar equipment will have to be repossessed, causing more hardship and damage to my home. My roof, only a few years old, will have to be repaired to fix the damages caused by the solar installation ( which has already started to leak ). Further, the reputation of the XXXX XXXX itself will become associated with swindling sales and misleading scams, hurting the vital process our nation is undergoing to produce sustainable energy infrastructure. I am deeply angered about the whole thing and hope that I can help to alert the broader public about the nature of this situation and how the promises simply dont line up with the realities. 
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation