Solar installation problems: your rights when the system underperforms

You signed a contract, paid a significant sum, and waited weeks for your solar system to go live. Now the panels are generating a fraction of what was promised, the inverter keeps faulting, or the roof has started leaking where the installer drilled through the tiles. The installer is either unresponsive or insisting everything is within spec. The Australian Consumer Law (ACL) gives you real rights here — but which ones depend on what actually failed.

Quick answer

A solar contract almost always involves both goods and services. The panels, inverter, battery, cabling and mounting hardware carry the ACL's goods guarantees; the sales advice, system design, installation, commissioning and connection work carry the services guarantees. Which remedy applies depends on whether the problem is with the equipment, the sales representations, the system design, the installation or the commissioning. Start with the business you contracted with. It cannot necessarily avoid responsibility by pointing you at a subcontracted installer or the equipment manufacturer, though separate rights against those parties may also exist.

The work must be done with due care and skill, the system must be reasonably fit for any purpose you made known and relied on them to achieve, and representations about output must have a reasonable basis. Where a business falls short you may be entitled to rectification, or — if the failure is major — to cancel and claim, or keep the contract and claim compensation. None of this can be excluded by a clause in the contract, and it sits alongside any manufacturer's warranty.

The right starting point, once you've tried to resolve things directly, is a written demand letter. You can generate one for free at fairgo in a few minutes.

What the law actually says

A typical solar contract is a mixed transaction. Goods guarantees (sections 54–56, with remedies in sections 259–263) apply to the equipment supplied — panels, inverter, battery, cabling, mounting components. Services guarantees apply to the advice, design, installation, commissioning and connection work: the principal ones are sections 60 to 62, with remedies in sections 267–270. Section 63 sets out exceptions rather than a further guarantee.

That split matters, because it decides who you claim against and what you can ask for.

Section 60 — due care and skill. The installation must be performed competently. That means correct panel orientation, properly torqued fixings, weatherproof penetrations, compliant wiring, and a system that actually functions. Workmanship or design defects may include inadequately sealed roof penetrations, loose or unsafe electrical connections, non-compliant mounting, or panel placement that departs from the agreed design or lacks a reasonable technical basis. Whether a particular orientation or tilt is defective depends on the site, the design constraints, what was agreed and expert evidence — a non-ideal angle is not automatically a breach.

Section 61 — fitness for disclosed purpose. If you told the installer you wanted a system capable of powering your home through summer peaks, and it was reasonable for you to rely on their skill and judgment in achieving that, the installed system must be reasonably fit for that purpose. Export capacity needs care here: the limit your system may export to the grid is usually set by the local distribution network, not chosen by the installer. What the retailer is answerable for is what it promised, whether it sought or explained any network pre-approval and export limit, and whether the shortfall was within its control. The reliance element matters: if the installer gave you a clear warning that your roof wasn't ideal and you proceeded anyway, the section 61 argument becomes harder.

Section 18 — misleading or deceptive conduct. A statement about annual generation, bill savings or payback may be misleading under section 18 of the ACL if it conveyed an inaccurate overall impression or had no reasonable basis. A result below forecast does not by itself prove misleading conduct: modelled generation, system capacity, network export limits, feed-in tariff eligibility, how much you use at home, tariffs, weather and shading are all different things, and a projection is not automatically a guarantee. What matters is the precise representation and the assumptions and qualifications behind it. Where conduct is misleading, section 236 can support a damages claim.

Section 64 — no contracting out. Any term in the installer's contract that attempts to limit or exclude these guarantees is void to the extent it excludes, restricts or modifies your rights under the ACL. A clause saying "we make no warranty as to system output" or "liability is limited to the cost of repair" does not override your statutory entitlements. Section 64A can permit a limited liability term for goods or services not of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use, where its conditions are met — but an ordinary household rooftop system is unlikely to need that analysis.

When is a service failure major? Under section 268, a services failure is major where a reasonable consumer fully aware of its nature and extent would not have acquired the service; where the service, or a product resulting from it, is substantially unfit for a purpose services of the same kind are commonly supplied for and cannot easily and within a reasonable time be remedied; where the service, or any product resulting from it, is unfit for a particular purpose you made known to the supplier and cannot easily and within a reasonable time be remedied to make it fit; where the service fails to achieve a result you made known and that cannot easily and within a reasonable time be remedied; or where the supply creates an unsafe situation. Section 268(2) also lets two or more failures be considered together, which is common on solar jobs where several smaller problems accumulate. That provision applies to contracts entered into on or after it commenced, so an older contract may need separate analysis.

Services remedies flow from section 267. For a non-major failure the installer gets the first reasonable opportunity to put it right within a reasonable time; if they refuse or take too long, you may have the work done elsewhere and recover the reasonable cost, or cancel where the statutory conditions are met. For a major failure you may cancel the services contract, or keep it and recover compensation for the difference between the value of the services supplied and the price paid.

Goods remedies work differently. If the equipment itself is not of acceptable quality, section 259(3) gives a choice between rejecting the goods — and then electing a refund or a replacement of the same type and similar value, if reasonably available — or keeping them and claiming the reduction in value. Rejection is subject to section 262, which sets the rejection period and the other circumstances in which rejection is not available; section 263 deals with what follows a valid rejection, including return or collection of the goods. Raise equipment faults promptly.

Separately from either, reasonably foreseeable loss caused by the failure may also be recoverable, subject to causation, evidence and taking reasonable steps to limit it.

When this applies (and when it doesn't)

The ACL applies when:

• You acquired it as a consumer under section 3 of the ACL: the amount paid was $100,000 or less, or the goods or services are of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use. Business or investment use does not automatically put you outside the ACL — the test is objective, and solar on a rented-out house may still qualify. Acquisitions for re-supply or for use in production need closer analysis.
• The installer is a business (or a sole trader acting in trade or commerce — most licensed electricians and solar installers will qualify).
• The failure relates to the quality or outcome of the installation, not simply a change of mind about having solar.

The ACL may not fully apply, or may be harder to rely on, when:

• The system is an unusual commercial installation, the amount paid exceeds $100,000, and it is not of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use.
• The underperformance is caused by factors genuinely outside the installer's control, such as unusual shading from a neighbour's new structure that didn't exist at the time of installation, or a defect in the panels themselves. A product defect does not leave you without a claim: the goods guarantees run against the business that supplied the equipment, which is often the same retailer that contracted for the installation.
• You agreed in writing to a reduced-output design because of your roof's constraints, and the system is performing consistently with that agreed design.

Solar work also sits inside an accreditation and licensing framework separate from the ACL, and it changed recently. Since 2024, installer and designer accreditation has been administered by Solar Accreditation Australia (SAA), which took over from the Clean Energy Council. SAA receives technical non-compliance reports about accredited people; it does not decide contractual, commercial or compensation disputes. Electrical licensing and safety sit with your state or territory regulator. A breach of any of these is a separate matter from your ACL claim, but it can support your factual case that the work was not done competently.

What to do today

Acting promptly matters. Delay can make it harder to establish that the fault reflects a failure at the time of installation rather than subsequent wear or external causes. Here is a practical sequence:

1. Get your system's performance data. Most inverters have a monitoring app or web portal. Download the generation data for every month since installation and compare it against the modelled output in your quote or contract. Compare like with like: account for weather, shading, outages, any network export limit or curtailment, how much you use at home, and the degradation allowance in the proposal. A consistent shortfall that survives those adjustments is your core evidence.

2. Document everything else. Photograph any physical defects: cracked tiles, exposed cabling, improperly sealed penetrations, panels that are visibly misaligned. Note dates and weather conditions.

3. Obtain an independent assessment. A written report from a suitably qualified independent inspector, designer, electrician or installer carries significant weight. SAA accreditation may be relevant, but independence, expertise, the scope of the inspection and the ability to identify the applicable technical requirements matter more than the label alone — and SAA does not carry out inspections for consumers, so the report is yours to obtain. It can identify whether underperformance stems from installation error, incorrect system design, or equipment fault. This is often the most important step before escalating.

4. Write to the installer in writing. Email is fine — it creates a dated record. Describe the problem specifically, reference the consumer guarantees under the ACL (due care and skill, fitness for purpose), attach your performance data and any independent report, and state clearly what remedy you are seeking. Give a reasonable deadline — 14 to 21 days is typical for a matter of this complexity.

5. Keep copies of everything. Your contract, the original quote, the site assessment and system design, any network approval and export limit, commissioning records, warranties, and any representations made during the sales process.

6. Treat electrical risk as urgent, not as evidence. If you can see scorching, smoke, exposed or damaged wiring, or you suspect a fire risk, do not touch the components and do not attempt to isolate anything unless it is safe and you have been told how. Call emergency services if there is immediate danger, otherwise a licensed electrician, and report the concern to your state or territory electrical safety regulator. Safety comes before building your claim.

If you are unsure how to structure the demand letter, fairgo can draft one for you based on your specific facts. The letter identifies the relevant ACL provisions automatically and is ready to send under your own name.

For context on how the due-care-and-skill guarantee works in practice, see our section 60 explainer. If your dispute also involves incomplete installation work, the builder-didn't-finish-work article covers similar escalation pathways.

What if the business refuses

If the installer ignores your letter, disputes the findings, or offers a remedy that doesn't match the scale of the problem, you have several escalation options.

Your state's consumer protection body. These bodies assess complaints and may offer information, assistance or conciliation, subject to their own eligibility criteria and priorities — they do not take on every dispute. They generally cannot make binding orders or compel the installer to participate, so check what yours will consider before lodging. A full list of state Fair Trading contacts is at /agencies.

State tribunals and courts. A binding decision requires a court or tribunal, and which one has jurisdiction depends on the dispute, the amount claimed and your state's enabling legislation. Tribunals such as NCAT, VCAT, QCAT and their equivalents hear some ACL disputes; for many others the Magistrates Court or equivalent is the correct forum. Confirm the forum, the current claim thresholds and the fees on the official site before filing — do not assume a tribunal has jurisdiction. Fee exemptions, waivers or deferrals may be available.

The ACCC. It handles systemic conduct rather than individual disputes. Reporting a business may contribute to broader enforcement action where there is a pattern of complaints, but it will not resolve your claim. For an individual dispute, your state consumer body may assist, while a court or tribunal with jurisdiction may be needed for a binding monetary remedy — and a specialist energy, building, accreditation or electrical-safety pathway may also apply, depending on what went wrong.

Industry and safety bodies — and what each can actually do. These are easy to confuse, and none of them will award you compensation:

• Solar Accreditation Australia takes technical non-compliance reports about SAA-accredited installers and designers, supported by evidence identifying the standard or requirement breached. It does not decide commercial, contractual or compensation disputes, does not inspect on a consumer's behalf, and its published process currently excludes systems more than five years old since commissioning. Check its current rules before preparing a report.
• Your state or territory electrical safety and licensing regulator handles unsafe electrical work and licensing breaches.
• The Clean Energy Council may consider complaints about retailers in programs it administers, such as the voluntary New Energy Tech Consumer Code. It no longer administers general installer accreditation.
• The Clean Energy Regulator deals with Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme certificates, fraud and scheme non-compliance — not ordinary workmanship complaints.

Reporting to these bodies can add pressure and is worth doing in parallel, but a binding refund or compensation order still requires a court or tribunal with jurisdiction.

Common mistakes

Relying only on the manufacturer's warranty. The panels and inverter will typically carry a product warranty from the manufacturer. That warranty is an additional contractual right and does not replace your ACL rights against the retailer or other business that supplied the goods or services. If that business arranged the installation through a subcontractor, it cannot ordinarily escape its own ACL responsibilities by directing you to the installer or the manufacturer. If the underperformance stems from poor installation design or workmanship rather than a product defect, the manufacturer's warranty may not respond at all — but the ACL still does.

Accepting "within tolerance" without scrutiny. Installers sometimes cite industry tolerance figures to explain away underperformance. Ask which contractual specification, modelling assumption or technical standard supports the figure quoted: no single percentage automatically decides whether the ACL has been complied with. Get an independent assessment before accepting a tolerance argument.

Not putting the complaint in writing. A phone call is not a demand. It creates no record, and the installer can later dispute what was said. Every substantive communication should be in writing from the outset.

Waiting too long. The ACL does not set a single fixed warranty-style expiry period for services guarantee claims, but timing matters. The longer you wait, the easier it becomes for the installer to argue that degradation is normal wear rather than a defect present at installation. Raise the issue as soon as the underperformance becomes apparent.

Letting a business redirect you to the manufacturer. If a panel or inverter is defective, the goods guarantees run against the business that supplied it — frequently the same retailer that sold you the installation. It cannot simply send you to the manufacturer. Sections 271 and 272 may separately support a damages claim against the manufacturer, but that is an additional route, not a replacement for your claim against the supplier.

Going straight to a tribunal without a demand letter. A written attempt to resolve the dispute is strongly advisable, and may be required or taken into account by the court or tribunal you file in. It also pins down the remedy you are seeking and creates useful evidence. Check the forum's pre-filing requirements before lodging.

Related reading

• Builder didn't finish the work? Your ACL rights explained
• Section 60 ACL — due care and skill for services
• Business refused your refund? Here's what to do next
• Services that go wrong — your ACL rights
• What "major failure" really means under the ACL
• Which consumer regulator handles what

This article is general information about Australian Consumer Law, not legal advice. The ACL is complex and your situation may have details that change the analysis. The article also describes complaint and escalation pathways — including state Fair Trading bodies, state tribunals, the ACCC, and licensing bodies — whose scope, rules, thresholds and processes sit outside the ACL and can change. Confirm the current position with the relevant body before lodging any complaint or claim. For advice on your specific case, see your state's Fair Trading body — full list at /agencies.