Need help?
Follow Us
Your cart is empty
A San Diego Superior Court case is exposing one of the most damaging chapters in Tesla Energy’s history: a Solar Roof installation that took six years, cost a customer well over $100,000, never generated a single watt of electricity, and — according to internal communications — was being monitored by Elon Musk himself as an experiment. The court has since deemed Tesla liable for fraud.
Ambrose Conroy, a homeowner in Rancho Santa Fe, California, signed a Tesla Solar Roof contract in March 2020 for $82,210 — covering a 13.1 kW system. By February 2021, after two contract amendments, that figure had grown to approximately $110,000 for an 18.2 kW roof and six Powerwalls. What followed, according to court records, was years of incomplete construction, failed county inspections, and a roof that never passed the threshold required to go live.
The installed Solar Roof never produced electricity for the house. Conroy estimates the cost to remediate the damage at well over $2.5 million. Tesla’s counter-offer at one point: $5,000.
The most striking element of the case is what the internal communications reveal about Tesla’s awareness of the situation at the highest level. Text messages from January 13, 2021 — now identified as Exhibit 224 in the trial exhibit list — show Tesla’s director of model engineering, Bobby Yang, and other Tesla employees discussing the project in terms of “experimenting” on Conroy’s house. The messages indicate that daily progress reports were being sent to Elon Musk directly.
That framing — treating a paying customer’s home as a test subject — is likely to be central to the fraud liability ruling. Judge Cynthia Freeland of San Diego Superior Court reached that finding on September 11, 2026, after Tesla repeatedly failed to meet discovery deadlines. The court had already sanctioned Tesla twice that year before issuing the fraud determination.
This case doesn’t exist in isolation. Tesla quietly discontinued its Solar Roof product around August 20, 2026, notifying third-party installers that tiles were no longer available for order. The company internally concluded the product was “not financially viable.” Tesla’s dedicated Solar Roof webpage now redirects to its solar panels section, and the product has been removed from the Tesla Energy navigation menu entirely.
The scale of the program’s failure is stark when measured against its ambitions. Elon Musk set a target of 1,000 Solar Roof installations per week back in 2019. According to available estimates, only approximately 3,000 total Solar Roofs were installed over seven years — a fraction of that goal. Pricing told a similar story of disconnect: the product was initially pitched at roughly $22 per square foot in 2016; actual installed costs reportedly reached around $62 per square foot, with average system costs approaching $106,000 and some exceeding $200,000.
Tesla has stated it will continue to honor warranties and service obligations for existing Solar Roof customers — a commitment that will now be tested against a growing backlog of unresolved cases as the Conroy lawsuit moves toward trial.
The fraud liability ruling is significant because it goes beyond the typical breach-of-contract dispute. A court finding of fraud opens Tesla to a different category of damages — and the gap between Conroy’s estimated remediation cost ($2.5 million) and Tesla’s settlement offer ($5,000) suggests the company badly miscalculated its exposure here. With Tesla having already admitted liability for breach of contract, breach of warranty, and negligence, the remaining trial will focus on the scope of damages rather than the question of fault.
For the roughly 3,000 households that do have functioning Solar Roofs, the discontinuation of the product raises legitimate questions about long-term parts availability and service support — even with Tesla’s warranty commitments on record. The Conroy case is a reminder that those commitments are only as strong as the company’s willingness to honor them under pressure.
Related Gear
Gear up your Tesla with tested, custom-fit BASENOR accessories — shop Tesla accessories →
Sources & reporting notes
The links below identify the material source records used for this report.
Source links are preserved as published or accessed. See our editorial standards and corrections policy.
The BASENOR Editorial Desk covers Tesla, SpaceX, and related technology, curating reporting from primary sources — official accounts, regulatory filings, and software release data. Every article passes source-record and fact-checking review before publication. About the newsroom.
This report was curated by the BASENOR Editorial Desk from the sources listed above. Read our editorial standards or email editorial@basenor.com to report an error.
Stay in the Loop
Join 27,000+ Tesla owners who get our tips first — plus 10% OFF
Shop Tesla Accessories — Free USA Shipping
Self-Driving
Tesla Austin Robotaxi Expands to 21 Hours: 5 Details That Matter
· 3 min read
Energy & Battery
Tesla Cybercab Gets a Smaller Battery — and More Range
· 3 min read
Self-Driving
Cybercab at NASA MAX POWER: 4 Details That Matter
· 3 min read
Buyer’s Guide
New Model Y Juniper? Buy These Accessories First, Not All at Once
13 min read
Buyer’s Guide
Model 3 Highland and Model Y Juniper Console Organizers: What Actually Fits
12 min read
Shop Tesla
Upgrade your Tesla with tested, custom-fit gear
Free USA shipping · 30-day returns
Get exclusive deals, new product alerts, and Tesla tips delivered weekly
We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe anytime.
BASENOR is not affiliated with or endorsed by Tesla. It is neither inferred nor implied that products sold by BASENOR are authorized by or in any way connected to Tesla. All manufacturer names, symbols, and descriptions used in our images and text are used solely for identification purposes only. Tesla Model S, Model X, Model 3, Model Y and Roadster are trademarks of Tesla.
© 2026 BASENOR
Powered by Shopify
Follow Us
We Accept
© 2026 BASENOR
Powered by Shopify
