HOA Put 60 Solar Panels on My Land — Then the Utility Asked, “Who Authorized This?”
Chapter 23
Theme:
Font Size:
24px
He was careful not to leap from that observation to a conclusion about criminal conduct or even the final utility decision. Projects do change, he explained, and utilities can review revised applications when site or equipment details change. What mattered was whether the revisions that reached the field also reached the people whose approvals depended on the earlier version. Here, the utility had reviewed one configuration while the contractor appeared to have installed another."So if the utility signs off later, that doesn't give them title to my land," I said."Correct. The utility may have reasons to ask for site-control documents, but its electrical approval doesn't transfer ownership or create an easement. Land rights still have to be established separately.""And the HOA board can't create land rights by approving a budget?""Not on land it doesn't control," he said. "But Naomi is the person to give you the precise legal answer. My job is to say what was submitted, what was installed, and whether those things match."We stopped beside the inverter pad. The gravel had been compacted into a hard rectangle, and the installation labels were crisp and new. Michael checked the cabinet dimensions and traced the approved equipment list against the actual labels. He found no reason to assume the crew had performed poor electrical workmanship from what was visible. That detail was important because my argument did not require the panels to be defective."These workers may have built a very good installation," Michael said. "That's entirely compatible with the installation being on the wrong parcel."For years I had thought of construction disputes in terms of shoddy work: foundations too shallow, drainage improperly graded, materials delivered below specification. This was different. The rows were straight, the equipment appeared orderly, and the problem existed before the first hole had been drilled. The mistake was carried from decision to document to ground with enough professionalism that people began treating it as a finished fact.Michael's written report arrived the following day. It described the original site, revised layout, installed field position, measurable differences, and the missing evidence of coordination between the revised construction location and the interconnection submission. He did not say the solar project was dangerous or that its equipment should be destroyed. He recommended resolving the discrepancy through the responsible parties, maintaining the utility hold, and verifying site control before any further commissioning activity.I sent the report to Naomi and Ryan. Ryan thanked me and asked whether Michael could join a call with his engineering group. I agreed. Two days earlier I might have treated any request from the installer as a delay tactic, but I was beginning to recognize that the right people in the process needed the same facts in order to correct it. Refusing to share accurate measurements would make the solution harder without making my land any more mine.