Pro Solar Hawaii the FTC and the CRFA of 2016

 It has been suggested that now that I have received the letter from the Hawaii Regulated Complaints office, I should file a complaint with the FTC about Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii has filed a lawsuit for my online reviews of the horrible service I received from him. I might point out Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii did not defend himself in any kind of a hearing to the RICO charges; he/just paid the fine. Yet, spends thousands of dollars to sue me for leaving reviews of him. Odd, no?

But, let us not stray off course. In 2016  due to the enormous number of lawsuits in the court systems, congress was forced to pass The Consumer Review Fairness Act (CRFA) This act is to protect people’s ability to share their honest opinions about a business’s products, services, or conduct, in any forum, including social media.

The law, as written, protects most honest consumer assessments, including online reviews, social media posts, upload photos/videos, etc. But, of wonder, it's not just product reviews it covers. It also applies to consumer evaluations of a company’s customer service. Is this not ultimately what this blog is?

Now, that last paragraph is important. Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii has often said that my posting reviews of the well-proven horrible service I received from him violates our contract. A contract that it appears even RICO says is not a valid contract. See, Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii says that an arbitration clause prevented me from posting my reviews and issues. I swear that's not an exaggeration.  

On July 5th, 2018, Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii through his attorney, filed in the Circuit Court of the third district in the state and county of Hawaii an amended complaint about "breach of contract." In "Count 1 - Breach Of Contract," paragraph 12 says my posting reviews is a violation of the contract. (see below)

This, as I have been informed, turns out to violate the CRFA. I've visited the FTC website, and I gotta tell ya, it looks clear to me to be a violation! I am no lawyer and have no idea if I understand it correctly. One has to ask:  Now, why would a lawyer admit in a court filing that his client has breached the CRFA? The FTC website is obvious.

"To make sure your company is complying with the Consumer Review Fairness Act:

• Review your form contracts, including online terms and conditions; and
• Remove any provision that restricts people from sharing their honest reviews, penalizes those who do, or claims copyright over peoples’ reviews (even if you’ve never tried to enforce it or have no intention of enforcing it)."

I have not, as of posting, spoken to my attorney about this. I am going to. If this is a violation of the CRFA, it is my duty as an American to inform the FTC of this intimidation. I've really got nothing to lose. I have the evidence of the violation in a paper filed in the court by Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii legal representative.

At this point, I have no reason not to file with the FTC about this. I could be wrong. In which case, nothing happens. But if I am correct, "The law specifies that a violation of the CRFA will be treated the same as violating an FTC rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice. This means that your company could be subject to financial penalties, as well as a federal court order." If I were Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii my action would concern me in the penalties would scare the hell outta me.

Read More

Because I am being asked

 It has become apparent to me that I didn't include enough information in my last post.  I didn't think to include what it is Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii did to receive the $2500 fine.

So, because I am being asked, let me explain exactly what regulated industries complaint office found that was a violation. In the "settlement before filing of petition for disciplinary action and boards final order" In Section A, Sentence #5 it says they want to go after Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii for violation of Hawaii Revised Statute: 444-25.5 (required disclosures in homeowners contract.) 

In addition violations of Hawaii Administrative Rules: 16-77-80 (required information and disclosures in homeowners contract.) Plus, the major blow to Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii, 16-77-97 (poor workmanship). See for yourself it's attached to the blog post.

You're probably asking yourself, what this means? Because I am being asked, let me say I am not a lawyer and the following information is based on a Google search. I may have interpreted it wrong. Here is how I interpret this:

The first 2 violations are pretty self-explanatory. A legal contract between a contractor and a consumer must include explicit "information and disclosures" those disclosures and information were not part of my contract with Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii. 

It also says in this "settlement before filing of petition for disciplinary action and boards final order" in Section B Sentance #5, that Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii "acknowledges RICO has sufficient cause to file petition for disciplinary action.." Quick question, how does one with a straight face say, "I didn't do anything wrong but, I acknowledge sufficient cause". How do they expect anyone including themselves, to believe they "did nothing wrong"? Don't you basically admit something is wrong with acknowledgment of sufficient cause? 

But, what about the "major blow" to Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii? The violation of 16-77-97 (poor workmanship) statute is due to not doing work based on industry standards.  Which, if you read the whole page added above, was my complaint!

In the end, we all know why a bad solar contractor such as Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii took the settlement and paid the $2500 fine. After admitting there is cause to go after him. He could never prove that he did not do anything wrong. A guy spending 1000's trying to drag me through the legal system on a case he has to know he cannot win. Isn't going to be shy about defending one of the many complaints to the Hawaii regulated industries complaint office if he didn't do anything wrong, of course. Yep, mine is not the only complaint, now or, in the past.

Before I continue, I'd like to give a shout out to all the lawyers (mostly mine; Peter L. Steinberg, Attorney at Law), people from all over the world, especially Hawaii, that have contacted my lawyer or me personally with advice, offers to testify against Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii, and support both moral and financial. You really prove this blog is in the public interest. Mahalo Nui Loa!

I'd like to take a moment to add a little something to this post for Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii eyes to read. Dude, your cases are totally screwed! I can only assume by your actions you are not as bright as the rest of the bulbs in the ceiling fan. Every day you don't come to my terms and settle with me, is another day closer to guaranteeing I get awarded the $1,000,000 I am suing you for. 

Read More