Power Home Remodeling Group Class Action Lawsuit: What the Court Records Show

Last reviewed: October 17, 2026. This article is general information, not legal advice. It reports allegations and court records only; allegations in pending cases are unproven, and case status can change, so check the court docket before relying on it.

If you've searched for a Power Home Remodeling Group class action lawsuit, you may have found sites promising payouts or claim forms. This page sticks to what federal court records show.

Short answer: The best-known Power Home Remodeling Group class action is Vasco v. Power Home Remodeling Group LLC, a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that settled for $5.2 million, approved in October 2016. Its claims period is over. As of October 2026, newer TCPA class actions against the company are pending in federal courts in Michigan and Pennsylvania, with no class certified and no settlement on the record.

The 2016 settlement: Vasco v. Power Home Remodeling Group

According to Judge Mark A. Kearney's memorandum approving the settlement (E.D. Pa. No. 15-4623, October 12, 2016):

• The claim. Teofilo Vasco gave his cell phone number to a salesperson at a Home Depot. He claimed Power Home then made 21 unsolicited calls to him. He sued under the TCPA for himself and others who received auto-dialed or prerecorded calls on their cell phones, seeking $500 per violation, treble damages for willful violations, costs and fees.
• The defense. Power Home asserted defenses including consent, statute of limitations, lack of intent to violate the Act and failure to state a claim. It produced a sample of records showing roughly 20 percent of call recipients had signed a consent for calls to their cell phone.
• The class. Everyone who received a call by or for Power Home on a cell phone using an automatic dialing system or prerecorded voice from October 16, 2013 to April 27, 2016. Notice was mailed to about 1,104,162 class members.
• The settlement. After mediation before retired U.S. Magistrate Judge Diane M. Welsh, Power Home agreed to a non-reversionary $5.2 million fund, including $1.3 million in attorneys' fees (25 percent), and administrative costs the parties capped at $1,180,000. The court reduced the plaintiff's requested service award from $5,000 to $3,000.
• Changed practices. The court recorded that, as a result of the litigation, Power Home modified its business practices on consent and cell phone calls.
• Claims. About 101,188 claims were filed, roughly 9 percent of the class. About 155 people opted out and four filed objections.

The court described Power Home as a regional "middle-man" that calls homeowners and arranges for independent contractors to perform the work, and noted its limited insurance and assets as a risk weighed in approving the settlement.

Cases pending as of October 2026

Public federal dockets show newer TCPA suits. All are at an early or middle stage, the allegations are unproven, and Power Home has not been found liable in them.

• Massarello v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC (E.D. Mich. No. 2:24-cv-12480). A proposed class action alleging prerecorded-voice calls to cell phones of people who had not given Power Home their number. On August 27, 2025, Judge Robert J. White denied Power Home's motion to dismiss. The docket shows discovery under way, with dispositive motions due by December 1, 2026. No class has been certified.
• Scofield v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC (E.D. Pa. No. 2:26-cv-07016), filed September 14, 2026. A proposed nationwide class action alleging telemarketing calls to numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry. Power Home's deadline to respond to the complaint was extended to November 9, 2026.
• Smith v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC (M.D. Fla. No. 2:26-cv-01927), filed June 8, 2026. An individual (not class) suit under the TCPA and Florida Telephone Solicitation Act alleging repeated calls after requests to stop. Power Home filed an answer on August 6, 2026.

Nothing changed in the status of the Vasco settlement since our last review. The Scofield case is new since August 2026.

What this means if you got sales calls

• You can't join a closed settlement. The Vasco claims process ended in 2016.
• A pending class action needs no action from you yet. If a class is certified or a settlement is reached, the court normally orders notice to class members, explaining how to claim or opt out.
• Keep records. Note dates, times, numbers and what was said, and save voicemails.
• Know your options. The TCPA lets an individual bring a claim, including in an appropriate state court, for certain unlawful calls. If you're considering a lawyer, see what percentage a lawyer gets in a settlement case and what is a reasonable settlement offer.

How to cut down unwanted sales calls

• Register with the National Do Not Call Registry at DoNotCall.gov or by calling 1-888-382-1222 from the phone you want to register. It's free, registration doesn't expire, and the FTC says it can take up to 31 days for sales calls to stop.
• Know the exceptions. Political, charitable, debt collection, informational and survey calls are still allowed, and companies you've recently done business with or given written permission to can call, though you can ask them to stop.
• Tell the company to stop and note the date you did.

Sources

• Vasco v. Power Home Remodeling Group LLC, No. 15-4623 (E.D. Pa.), memorandum approving settlement, October 12, 2016 (GovInfo, U.S. Government Publishing Office)
• Massarello v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC, No. 2:24-cv-12480 (E.D. Mich.), docket (CourtListener)
• Scofield v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC, No. 2:26-cv-07016 (E.D. Pa.), docket (CourtListener)
• Smith v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC, No. 2:26-cv-01927 (M.D. Fla.), docket (CourtListener)
• Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (Cornell LII)
• National Do Not Call Registry FAQs (Federal Trade Commission)