The number that should worry every subscription business
Utilities Disputes received 440 solar complaints in the year to 31 March 2026, up 105% on the prior year. The standout figure is not the growth rate. It is that SolarZero accounts for 20.8% of accepted deadlocked complaints while holding only 0.5% of the electricity market.
A ratio like that does not come from bad call centres or slow refunds. It comes from a gap between what customers thought they were buying and what the contract actually delivered. And when the product is a 20-year lease, that gap does not close, it compounds.
What people signed, versus what they got
SolarZero went into liquidation in November 2024, placed there by US owner BlackRock with roughly $40 million owing to workers, tradies and creditors. Around 15,000 households remain locked into 20-year leases, now serviced by Verofi through its SZ Servicing entity.
The pitch was cheap, stable power, often quoted at 8c per kilowatt for imported electricity. The reality has diverged sharply. Customer Mark Wellington, who lives alone and does not use electricity for heating or cooking, told RNZ “my original price per kilowatt was 8c and 15c but now it’s 26c and 15c”, and he still gets a monthly power bill through winter.
Another customer said she was switched to time-of-use pricing in December 2024 without clear consent, an overnight peak increase of 225%. As she put it, “there is no way I would have locked myself into a 20-year contract with those high fixed fees” had she understood the terms, noting she pays a $160-plus-GST monthly fee before using any power at all. Rohan Metrani, spending $400 a month on power plus his lease, was blunter still: “it’s become more of a liability at this stage.”
In September 2025, Newsroom documented one customer whose bill jumped from $124.11 in February to $503.34 in March after price protection was removed, and found some customers could no longer even access their original contracts because the web links had gone dead.
The exit door costs up to $30,000
The only practical way out is to buy the system outright. By May 2026, Newsroom reported customers being quoted up to $30,000 to do so, with earlier quotes of upwards of $20,000 to buy or relocate systems. Selling a house with a SolarZero contract attached is proving difficult too. This is the defining feature of the model: the escape hatch is priced to keep you inside.
The regulators are circling, slowly
The Commerce Commission confirmed in October 2025 it was assessing a Fair Trading Act investigation into 162 complaints, 66 of them received after liquidation, focused on misleading conduct and contract transparency. By May 2026 it had flagged gaps in consumer protection for long-term solar subscription models.
Utilities Disputes Commissioner Neil Mallon said his office is “working on some general guidance for consumers” specifically targeting long-term solar subscriptions. That the guidance is only being written now tells you the framework was never built for this product. Timing does not help: the Electricity Authority’s compliance report found that of 51 retailers assessed to 30 June 2025, only 35% self-assessed full compliance with Consumer Care Obligations, which only took full effect on 1 April 2025, after most of the SolarZero damage was done.
Public money underwrote the illusion
This was not purely a private failure. A $115 million public loan was secured against revenue projections that proved illusory, including a forecast of $75 per battery per month that was badly overestimated. Customers were, in effect, underwriting that flawed model through their leases while believing they were backing a more energy-resilient New Zealand.
Both major parties have absorbed the lesson. Labour energy spokesperson Megan Woods said the “Solar Zero experience was partly why Labour’s SolarSaver was designed to let households own their systems outright.” Ownership, not subscription, is now the preferred model.
The commercial lesson does not wait for the verdict
SZ Servicing says it adjusted pricing “in line with contract terms” and to reflect grid market increases, and has engaged with affected customers. That may well hold up legally. It is also beside the point commercially. The company says the contract permits what it did. Customers say the contract was never properly explained. Both can be true, and that is exactly the trap.
New Zealand’s residential solar market is still early, with just over 63,000 systems installed by the end of 2024, roughly 2-3% of homes. An industry that needs long-term trust to scale has been handed a cautionary tale at the worst moment. For anyone selling a multi-year service contract, the takeaway is unambiguous: when you ask a household to commit for 20 years, contract clarity is not the legal fine print around the product. It is the product.
Sources
- Angry customers complain about SolarZero contracts (2026-07-14)
- SolarZero customer contracts vanish into thin air as they grapple with rising bills (2025-09-12)
- Watchdog warns of ‘gaps’ in protection as SolarZero complaints mount (2026-05-01)
- Commerce Commission investigating SolarZero for abandoning customers (2025-10-31)
- 2025 Consumer Care Obligations Annual Compliance Report (2026-02-09)
- Residential Solar in New Zealand: Understanding the Customer Journey (2025-06)
- $115m public loan depends on illusory solar power revenues (2024-12-13)