VOORHEESVILLE — A conflict has arisen between a growing solar energy company and a Voorheesville couple over whether or not a birch tree or poor planning have caused a lack of energy output.

The couple, Beth and Jason Herr, said that the solar panels installed on their property at the start of 2015 produce only about 58 percent of the electricity that the company had predicted. They are asking for a refund and removal of the panels or a partial refund for the lack of electricity produced.

The Herrs are paying the company, Monolith Solar, $125 a month on a zero interest loan for the solar panels. The idea is that homeowners would pay for the panels in place of a bill from National Grid, but the Herrs have said they are still paying about $80 each month for electricity not provided by the solar panels. Because the loan payments are designed to parallel a homeowners’ electric bill before using solar, the Herrs say they are paying about $80 more than they were before they bought the panels.

Steven Erby, the president and owner of Monolith, said there is a “lengthy history” between the Herrs and his company. Erby said there is nothing wrong with the design of the panels or the placement, but that a fast-growing birch tree had eventually blocked the panels. Even though the contract for the panels states that the owners are responsible for tree removal, said Erby, the company offered to remove the tree and replace it with a shorter, slower-growing tree like a dogwood.

Both the Herrs said that the panel placement had been designed with the tree in mind, as they had told the company that the tree, which Beth Herr says stands about 24 feet tall, needed to stay in order to add home value and to use its shade to prevent a room in the house with an 8-by-24 foot skylight from getting too warm in the summer.

The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority had paid an incentive to Monolith totaling $7,020, said NYSERDA communications manager Tricia King. Because of the lower-than-projected energy output, NYSERDA is entitled to a refund of $2,948.40 if the problem is not corrected, according to information relayed by the Herrs from Frank Mace, a NYSERDA official. Michael Saltzman, who works in communications at NYSERDA, stated that the organization is waiting for the conflict between Monolith and the Herrs to be resolved before seeking this refund.

The incentive was one of the reasons the cost of installing the panels was reduced from $35,100 to $13,424. The estimated tax benefits also took off $13,424. The Herrs said they made a downpayment of $1,742.50 and signed a contract agreeing to make the monthly payments of $125 over eight years and seven months, with an additional $38.50 in a final payment. They also paid around $1,300 to a tree removal service to take down trees, as they were recommended to do by Monolith.

Erby said it would cost less to pay back NYSERDA than it would be to cover the costs of removing and replacing the birch tree, but said the company would be willing to do so because it relies on referrals from customers to make a majority of its sales.

The Herrs said an engineer from Monolith had suggested re-evaluating the placement and number of panels rather than remove the tree, but the engineer had left the company before beginning this task, and no one else at the company had taken up his suggestions, said the couple.

Last week, the couple heard back from the New York State Attorney General's Consumer Frauds and Protection Bureau after submitting a complaint a few weeks earlier, stating that the bureau had been in contact with Monolith.