Solar Fraud

In a significant legal action that underscores the growing concerns around the solar panel installation industry, Zamena Khan has filed a lawsuit against Affordable Solar Roof & Air LLC (ASRA) and Dividend Finance Inc., alleging a series of fraudulent practices, contract breaches, and elder exploitation. This case, set in the Circuit Court of the 9th Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County, Florida, represents a crucial fight for justice and consumer protection in the face of deceptive business practices.

The Joshua S. Horton Law Firm, PA not only uncovers the collaborative deceit among contractors, lenders, marketers, and debt purchasers but also highlights a particularly vile facet of exploitation: targeting elderly individuals through illegal practices, in violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) and other Florida Laws designed to protect vulnerable consumers.

In the legal landscape, particularly in jurisdictions like Florida and Washington D.C., two prominent methods of dispute resolution are arbitration and litigation. Both have their unique characteristics, benefits, and drawbacks. This article aims to provide a comparative analysis of these two methods, assisting legal practitioners and clients in making informed decisions. Here at the Joshua S. Horton Law Firm, PA, we understand these differences and will use the appropriate tool for the case.

In recent years, Florida has seen a significant increase in door-to-door sales, particularly in the solar panel industry. While this sales method can be convenient for consumers, it also raises certain legal considerations under Florida’s door-to-door solicitation statute, codified in §501.022, Florida Statutes. This blog post aims to provide a comprehensive overview of this statute and its implications for solar panel contracts, including the validity of arbitration clauses in contracts that violate the statute.

With the court denying GM Law Firm’s motion for summary judgment, the case is now advancing to a jury trial in January 2024. This development is not just a procedural step; it symbolizes a critical juncture in the fight for accountability in an industry often criticized for exploiting vulnerable borrowers.