Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/12) */
CITY OF PITTSBURG
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
65 Civic Avenue, Pittsburg, California XXXXX
DATE: November 12, 2015
TO: Revdex.com Case [redacted] - [redacted]
FROM: [redacted] Account Clerk
SUBJECT: [redacted]
The City of...
Pittsburg has consistently applied its billing policies and practices to Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] hasn't been unfairly treated nor has she been charged any fees not consistent with the normal billing practices. In fact, Ms. [redacted] has not been able to keep her account in good standing since her account was opened 6/30/09. She has paid 63 late fees and has had her water shut off 7 times for non-payment of the bill. Her meter is in the backyard and she has been uncooperative with the City in allowing backyard access for meter repairs.
On 7/16/15, a pink notice (past due delinquent statement) was sent to Ms. [redacted] stating payment in the amount of $101.45 must be made on her water account by 7/27/15 or the water would be shut off for non-payment of bill. Since this payment was not made on 7/27/15, the Public Works Department went to the property on 7/28/15 to do the shut off. She has a backyard meter and her gate was locked. We were unable to do the shut off and left her a door hanger advising her that payment must be made asap. In situations where the City is not given access to the meter to perform work, or as in her case to shut-off service, the same effort would have been put in to do the actual work by the Public Works Department so customers would still be charged the applicable fee.
On 7/28/15 (11:16 am), we showed a payment made online by Ms. [redacted] for $102 however this was too late (1 day late from her due date of 7/27/15) to prevent the Public Works Department from going to her property to perform the shut-off in the morning of 7/28/15. The City's requirements regarding discontinuance of service are clearly stated in the customers pink notices.
"Your water service is SCHEDULED TO BE DISCONTINUED unless payment for the TOTAL AMOUNT DUE is received no later than 5:00pm on the due date"
"If your service is scheduled for shut off, a minimum charge of $59 reconnection fee will be added to the total amount due and a deposit of $250 could be required"
A copy of Ms. [redacted] pink notice is enclosed. Additionally, the City now requires a $250 deposit on her account as a result of having her account deemed shut-off and delinquent.
On 8/24/15 Ms. [redacted] addressed a letter to the City disputing two charges; $59 reconnection fee and $250 deposit. These charges are assessed to all accounts when there is a delinquent shut off. I have attached her letter for your review. I phoned Ms. [redacted] and advised that the City is unable to reverse or waive these charges.
On 9/15/15 Ms. [redacted] phoned and advised that payment had been made on 7/27/15. Per our records, she processed an online payment on 7/28/15 (11:16 am). I advised her since our records showed 7/28/15 proof of payment from her bank must be provided. She faxed over a printout that was very difficult and unclear to read. I phoned her and asked that she bring in the original printout for review.
On 9/16/15, she again faxed the same statement. I spoke with [redacted], Director of Finance. He also agreed that the original statement must be brought to City Hall for review. He spoke with Ms. [redacted] and relayed this information to her. She was also advised that she must come to City Hall within two days.
Ms. [redacted] did not come to City Hall but made a payment in the amount of $145 on 9/18/15. Our process is not new to Ms. [redacted]. She had similar situation in December 2014 where her water was shut-off and requested to have the reconnection fee waived. The City did not waive any of her fees.
Based on the events and information provided on Ms. [redacted] account, her account was charged properly and would not be waived.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2015/12/22) */
Complaint is this water company is harrasing me,charging late fees when I payed on time.
I contacted Revdex.com last month regarding an issue regarding the water company charging fees that shouldn't be charged.
reconnection fee and a deposit fee. I was forced to pay but since then I have been getting harassed by them.I make a payment on time and for the whole amount for that month,and the next day I will receive a pink notice saying I have to pay $200 plus in a couple days.The reason for pink notice is if you haven't paid.Not only did I pay on time I have been paying more then what my bill should be and the bill is always high.
12/17 $71.39, 11/3$257.21,10/21 $145,9/14 $40.13,7/29 $102.00...And the bill still isn't paid of according to there records.On top of that my bill of water usage is mysteriously high.Its just me and my daughter here there is no way the water should be this high.
billing adjustment and the deposit back $250 plus $59.And to get out here that what this water company is doing is not right.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2016/01/04) */
We are sorry to hear that Ms. [redacted] feels she is being harassed. We are just following city policies and practices consistent with all of our customers given her circumstance. Her account was reviewed in detail and we did not find any inconsistencies in our billing and collection process and so we are unable to waive any fees as requested.
Enclosed is Ms. [redacted] account history since she opened her account on 6/13/2009. With the exception of 3 billing months, her account was never current and kept a running balance every month for all the time she had her account with the city. Underlined the receipts (recent payments as she noted on her comments 12/17 $71.39, 11/3$257.21,10/21 $145,9/14 $40.13,7/29 $102.00...) on the first page of the report to show that the city had been recording her payments properly.
Although lately she has been paying more that her current bill, she has accumulated balances from previous months where she did not make any payments or paid less than the month's bill. Any payments received on the account will apply to past due balances first before the current month's bill. Her account will continue to be delinquent and have the risk of being scheduled for shut-off if any of these past due balances become outstanding for more than 45 days. On 12/21/15, the city allowed Ms. [redacted] to make a payment arrangement on her remaining balance of $223.95 payable by 1/21/16. As long as she makes this payment on time and starts to consistently pay her entire bill every month, Ms. [redacted] account will remain current.
We are also enclosing her consumption report reflecting her monthly water usage (in Units) to ensure her account had been charged correctly.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/12) */
CITY OF PITTSBURG
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
65 Civic Avenue, Pittsburg, California XXXXX
DATE: November 12, 2015
TO: Revdex.com Case [redacted] - [redacted]
FROM: [redacted] Account Clerk
SUBJECT: [redacted]
The City of...
Pittsburg has consistently applied its billing policies and practices to Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] hasn't been unfairly treated nor has she been charged any fees not consistent with the normal billing practices. In fact, Ms. [redacted] has not been able to keep her account in good standing since her account was opened 6/30/09. She has paid 63 late fees and has had her water shut off 7 times for non-payment of the bill. Her meter is in the backyard and she has been uncooperative with the City in allowing backyard access for meter repairs.
On 7/16/15, a pink notice (past due delinquent statement) was sent to Ms. [redacted] stating payment in the amount of $101.45 must be made on her water account by 7/27/15 or the water would be shut off for non-payment of bill. Since this payment was not made on 7/27/15, the Public Works Department went to the property on 7/28/15 to do the shut off. She has a backyard meter and her gate was locked. We were unable to do the shut off and left her a door hanger advising her that payment must be made asap. In situations where the City is not given access to the meter to perform work, or as in her case to shut-off service, the same effort would have been put in to do the actual work by the Public Works Department so customers would still be charged the applicable fee.
On 7/28/15 (11:16 am), we showed a payment made online by Ms. [redacted] for $102 however this was too late (1 day late from her due date of 7/27/15) to prevent the Public Works Department from going to her property to perform the shut-off in the morning of 7/28/15. The City's requirements regarding discontinuance of service are clearly stated in the customers pink notices.
"Your water service is SCHEDULED TO BE DISCONTINUED unless payment for the TOTAL AMOUNT DUE is received no later than 5:00pm on the due date"
"If your service is scheduled for shut off, a minimum charge of $59 reconnection fee will be added to the total amount due and a deposit of $250 could be required"
A copy of Ms. [redacted] pink notice is enclosed. Additionally, the City now requires a $250 deposit on her account as a result of having her account deemed shut-off and delinquent.
On 8/24/15 Ms. [redacted] addressed a letter to the City disputing two charges; $59 reconnection fee and $250 deposit. These charges are assessed to all accounts when there is a delinquent shut off. I have attached her letter for your review. I phoned Ms. [redacted] and advised that the City is unable to reverse or waive these charges.
On 9/15/15 Ms. [redacted] phoned and advised that payment had been made on 7/27/15. Per our records, she processed an online payment on 7/28/15 (11:16 am). I advised her since our records showed 7/28/15 proof of payment from her bank must be provided. She faxed over a printout that was very difficult and unclear to read. I phoned her and asked that she bring in the original printout for review.
On 9/16/15, she again faxed the same statement. I spoke with [redacted], Director of Finance. He also agreed that the original statement must be brought to City Hall for review. He spoke with Ms. [redacted] and relayed this information to her. She was also advised that she must come to City Hall within two days.
Ms. [redacted] did not come to City Hall but made a payment in the amount of $145 on 9/18/15. Our process is not new to Ms. [redacted]. She had similar situation in December 2014 where her water was shut-off and requested to have the reconnection fee waived. The City did not waive any of her fees.
Based on the events and information provided on Ms. [redacted] account, her account was charged properly and would not be waived.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2015/12/22) */
Complaint is this water company is harrasing me,charging late fees when I payed on time.
I contacted Revdex.com last month regarding an issue regarding the water company charging fees that shouldn't be charged.
reconnection fee and a deposit fee. I was forced to pay but since then I have been getting harassed by them.I make a payment on time and for the whole amount for that month,and the next day I will receive a pink notice saying I have to pay $200 plus in a couple days.The reason for pink notice is if you haven't paid.Not only did I pay on time I have been paying more then what my bill should be and the bill is always high.
12/17 $71.39, 11/3$257.21,10/21 $145,9/14 $40.13,7/29 $102.00...And the bill still isn't paid of according to there records.On top of that my bill of water usage is mysteriously high.Its just me and my daughter here there is no way the water should be this high.
billing adjustment and the deposit back $250 plus $59.And to get out here that what this water company is doing is not right.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2016/01/04) */
We are sorry to hear that Ms. [redacted] feels she is being harassed. We are just following city policies and practices consistent with all of our customers given her circumstance. Her account was reviewed in detail and we did not find any inconsistencies in our billing and collection process and so we are unable to waive any fees as requested.
Enclosed is Ms. [redacted] account history since she opened her account on 6/13/2009. With the exception of 3 billing months, her account was never current and kept a running balance every month for all the time she had her account with the city. Underlined the receipts (recent payments as she noted on her comments 12/17 $71.39, 11/3$257.21,10/21 $145,9/14 $40.13,7/29 $102.00...) on the first page of the report to show that the city had been recording her payments properly.
Although lately she has been paying more that her current bill, she has accumulated balances from previous months where she did not make any payments or paid less than the month's bill. Any payments received on the account will apply to past due balances first before the current month's bill. Her account will continue to be delinquent and have the risk of being scheduled for shut-off if any of these past due balances become outstanding for more than 45 days. On 12/21/15, the city allowed Ms. [redacted] to make a payment arrangement on her remaining balance of $223.95 payable by 1/21/16. As long as she makes this payment on time and starts to consistently pay her entire bill every month, Ms. [redacted] account will remain current.
We are also enclosing her consumption report reflecting her monthly water usage (in Units) to ensure her account had been charged correctly.