Dealer Name: Sunrise Lighting also called Sunrise Lights (Northridge, California)

Better Business Bureau Complaints: 76 (Seventy six!)
Better Business Bureau Rating: F
The BBB (Better Business Bureau), defines the F rating as follows: We strongly question the company’s (Sunrise Lighting, Northridge, Ca.) reliability for reasons such as that they have failed to respond to complaints, their advertising is grossly misleading, they are not in compliance with the law’s licensing or registration requirements, their complaints contain especially serious allegations, or the company’s industry is known for its fraudulent business practices.

Summary of complaints filed with BBB, and other forums on Sunrise Lighting (Northridge, Ca.):
Complainants allege a variety of delivery and billing related complaints. Some customers complain that Sunrise Lighting sent them incorrect merchandise, partial orders, or in some cases, no delivery at all. Other complainants allege excessive delays with deliveries, rude customer service agents, or that their credit cards were charged more than once for the same item. Most complainants allege they encounter difficulty with returns and refunds.
Sunrise Lighting responds to some complaints by shipping orders, or providing tracking information on missing orders. The company failed to specifically address some allegations, and disputed most customer service issues. Some customers are not satisfied with the responses, and claim they are still waiting for merchandise or a refund.

Overall Summary on Sunrise Lighting (Northridge Ca.): Well the fact that this place has only been in business for around 4 years and already has 76 claims and an F rating with the BBB, not to mention several more complaints on other sites and other forums says it all! What is really scary is the seriousness of some of the complaints filed by consumers. Their web site seems to be misleading by indicating 20 years. However BBB records and Public records verify that the 2004 start date is correct and not the 20 years they falsely post on their site.

Sunrise Lighting Dealer Contact Information:
Dealer Alias: Sunrise Lights
Owner: Hany Hanna, A.K.A. Michael Hanna (based on BBB records)
Date business began: April 2004
City: Northridge
State: California
Add: 9349 Melvin Ave Unit #1
Phone: (818)772-0500
Fax: (818)772-0599
Email: sales@sunriselights.com
Web Site: www.sunriselights.com and www.sonriselighting.com

>>>>>>>>>> For MORE Feedback on SUNRISE LIGHTING click here. <<<<<<<<<<

Dealer Name: Electra Lighting & Supply (3 locations)
Better Business Bureau Complaints: 84 (Eighty Four)
Rip-Off Report Complaints: 3 (Three)
Better Business Bureau Rating: Unsatisfactory
The BBB (Better Business Bureau), defines the F rating as follows: A company has an unsatisfactory business performance record with the bureau is based on the experiences reflected in BBB files. This file condition results when the company has failed to resolve or respond to complaints, repeatedly failed to respond or resolve issues in a timely manner, failed to resolve the underlying issues for a pattern of complaints, failed to honor their commitment to mediate or arbitrate disputes or discontinue false advertising claims that are challenged by the BBB, or failed to discontinue unauthorized use of the BBB name and logo, a federally protected trademark.

Summary of complaints filed with BBB, and other forums on Electra Lighting:
Electra Lighting & Electric Co., which has locations in Monroeville and North Huntington, was accused of violating the State's unfair trade practices and consumer protection law in a civil lawsuit filed by Attorney General Tom Corbett.
More than a dozen consumers complained that Electra Lighting ignoring their requests for refunds on merchandise that was damaged, not as ordered or delivered significantly beyond the contracted time period. Other forums report of never receiving merchandise ordered and receiving damaged merchandise.

Overall Summary on Electra Lighting (3 locations.): When evaluating complaint information, please consider the company's size and volume of business and that they have been in business since 1980.The number of complaints filed against the business may not be as important as the type of complaints and how the business handled them The BBB processed a total of 84 complaints about this business in the last 36 months, our standard reporting period. Of the total 84 complaints in the last 36 months, 43 of those were closed in the last 12 months Complaints Concerned Sales Practice Issues: 6 Outcome of all complaints. No Response: 6

Electra Lighting & Supply Dealer Contact Information:
Owner: Michael Free (based on BBB records)
Date business began: March 1980
City: North Huntingdon
State: PA
Add:
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Web Site:


Dealer Name: Decorating Etc (Wayne, NJ)
Better Business Bureau Complaints: 17 (Seventeen)
Rip-Off Report Complaints: 4 (Four)
Better Business Bureau Rating: Unsatisfactory
The BBB (Better Business Bureau), defines the unsatisfactory rating as follows: A company has an unsatisfactory business performance record with the bureau is based on the experiences reflected in BBB files. This file condition results when the company has failed to resolve or respond to complaints, repeatedly failed to respond or resolve issues in a timely manner, failed to resolve the underlying issues for a pattern of complaints, failed to honor their commitment to mediate or arbitrate disputes or discontinue false advertising claims that are challenged by the BBB, or failed to discontinue unauthorized use of the BBB name and logo, a federally protected trademark.

Summary of complaints filed with BBB, and other forums on Decorting Etc:
Most complaints on Rip-Off report are about late deliveries, damaged materials, bad customer service and return policy. When considering complaint information, please take into account the company's size and volume of transactions, and understand that the nature of complaints and a firm's responses to them are often more important than the number of complaints. The BBB processed a total of 17 complaints about this company in the last 36 months, our standard reporting period. Of the total of 17 complaints closed in 36 months, 13 were closed in the last year..

Overall Summary on Decorting Etc : Hard to gauge. Their web site as of June 2008 gives no company adreess, and owners name. There is no phone local number as well to gauge their address. Public records show several addresses in New Jersey and corporation in Virginia?? What seems more odd is that they post “Lighting Sensation” as the company name but no more information, yet the URL and other clues point to the name Decorating Etc. Whats going on here?

Decorating-etc Dealer Contact Information:
Owner: No Info. (based on BBB records)
Date business began: No Info
City: Wayne
State: NJ
Add:
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Web Site: www.decorating-etc.com

The above list is sorted by order of lighting dealers with the most overall complaints or with the most serious complaints with the BBB, and consumer reports via our feedback.

Reminder: Please file your complaint on any lighting dealer with the BBB, Complaints.com, The Attorney Generals office of your State, Consumer Lighting Reports and any other forums to help keep the public aware of bad lighting dealers.

The above list does not consist of every lighting dealer on the planet with negative BBB records etc. These are the dealers that we have received feedback on.
Please email us if you know of any lighting dealers that should be on this list.

Please send us any feedback on any lighting companies that have many complaints that you are aware of (and that we can view on the BBB and RipOff report web sites). Please report any errors here.

= Thumbs up/Thumbs down is based on that dealers BBB rating and amount of negative feedback and complaints on public web forums. If there is no Thumb besides the dealer, it simply means there is no BBB information available on that dealer.

About Us:

We apologize but in order to stay neutral we do not accept advertisers.
This site provides a gathering of information obtained from areas that are available to the general public. We also display information provided in a feedback form from consumer experience, investigations and reports on lighting dealers nationwide via public web forums and our feedback forms.
This site was created as a consumer awareness site, specifically related to lighting for many reasons. One of which is that lighting is part of everyone's life. People don't realize it or even think about it but Lighting is everywhere. For example, last year over 650 million bulbs were sold! That's just bulbs. What this means is that we must be careful of, for health, safety and financial reasons, who and where we buy our lights from. This is where this site can be helpful. Rather than you taking the time to research each lighting dealer, we have gathered the information for you and will continue to expand on it. THIS ALLOWS YOU TO MAKE A MORE EDUCATED DECISION ON WHO TO BUY YOUR LIGHTING FIXTURES FROM. We can only do this with your help by your continued feedback and reports on your experience.

This site is compiled from information gathered from the public, public web forums, contractors, architects and other professionals. Reporters target Lighting dealers that aggressively advertise on the Internet, A.K.A. "High Profile" Lighting Dealers. We are not responsible for its accuracy and content. Please report any errors here.
Additionally, we want to note that this is purely for information purposes and in no way is our intent to dissuade you from buying from dealers listed here with negative reports or to lead you to purchase from any certain dealers. This is a gathering of information from various public sources and feedback. The information gathered into this one site from public forums is strictly to help inform the consumer on information that any consumer can gather on their own, yet this site has gathered what it can find in public forums for the consumer, thus hopefully making it easier and faster to make a decision on who to buy lighting from.However, we highly suggest you confirm many things on your own for your own peace of mind before you buy from any lighting dealer! For example, if you see that there is a dealer noted here with an "F" rating from the BBB, then simply go to the BBB website and check that dealer out for yourself. The above list was authored by a husband and wife team after researching lighting decided that the information they gathered was to valuable to not share with the public. Therefore they submitted it to us and we appreciate it. Not responsible for any ommisions, mistakes, typos, errors, etc.

The CDA provides that when a user writes and posts material on a website such as ours, the site itself cannot, in most cases, be held legally responsible for the posted material. Specifically, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) states, "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
Because the reports/feedback here are authored by users of the site, we cannot be legally regarded as the "publisher or speaker" of the reports contained here, and hence we are not liable for reports even if they contain false or inaccurate information.
Why...Simple: Websites cannot police the accuracy of the massive volume of information which their users may post. If a disgruntled person(s) were permitted to hold a website liable for information that the site did not create, this would stifle free speech as fewer and fewer sites would be willing to permit users to post anything at all. See generally Batzel v. Smith, 333 F.3d 1018, 1027-28 (9th Cir. 2003) (recognizing, "Making interactive computer services and their users liable for the speech of third parties would severely restrict the information available on the Internet. Section 230 [of the CDA] therefore sought to prevent lawsuits from shutting down websites and other services on the Internet.")
Each lower federal district court and federal appellate court that has construed the CDA has held that websites like ours are immune from virtually every type of civil liability should the site has been sued based on information posted by a third party. See Doe v. America Online, Inc., 783 So.2d 1010 (Fl. 2001); Green v. America Online, 318 F.3d 465, 470 (3rd Cir. 2003) (noting that the CDA, "‘precludes courts from entertaining claims that would place a computer service provider in a publisher's role,' and therefore bars ‘lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for its exercise of a publisher's traditional editorial functions - such as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone, or alter content.'"); Carafano v. Metrosplash.com, Inc., 339 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 2003); Schneider v. Amazon.com, Inc., 31 P.3d 37 (Wash.App. 2001); Doe v. GTE Corp., 347 F.3d 655 (7th Cir. 2003); Zeran v. America Online, Inc., 129 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 1997); Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F. Supp. 44 (D. D.C. 1998).
Main article: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act was not part of the original Senate legislation, but was added in conference with the House, where it had been separately introduced by Representatives Chris Cox (R-CA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) as the Internet Freedom and Family Empowerment Act and passed by a near-unanimous vote on the floor. It added protection for online service providers and users from action against them for the actions of others, stating in part that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider". Effectively, this section immunizes ISPs and other service providers from torts committed by users over their systems, unless the provider fails to take action after actual notice or is itself involved in the process of creation or development of the content[1]. As a result of the Seigenthaler incident, and other incidents where individuals have been allegedly libeled by anonymous or judgment-proof parties, this section of the Act has come under fire, with numerous calls for revisions to the Act to restore service provider liability in some cases.[citation needed]

Through the Good Samaritan provision, this section also protects ISPs from liability for restricting access to certain material or giving others the technical means to restrict access to that material.
See also::* OCILLA portion of the DMCA, which contingently protects online service providers from liability for copyright infringement