Critter Barn

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action...

would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[SDG&E would ONLY look at my complaint if I submitted a "claim" via their Claims Department. I did so, and explained that what I have is not a typical "claim" its an accusation and confirmation of my knowledge that they lured customers (including me) into signing up for a false contest, called Manage-Act-Save which was really a Behavior Modification Program (as stated in email by their own employee), and then cut entrants off from participation at their own whim.  It was when they "disqualified" me from the contest because my house was "no longer in a qualified geographic area" that I realized this sham.  My house did not move - after 2.5 years they changed the geographic focus area of their behavioral experiment.  I maintain that SDG&E knowingly enrolled their customers into this false contest, failed to track and disperse the promised award points and prizes as stated in the contest rules (that SDG&E employees confirmed in writing to me were wrong, AND treated contest entrants differently - not equally as contest entrants are supposed to be treated.   I maintain that I am due compensation for the time I was enrolled in what was a truly a research program and not a contest. They are also withholding award points that I have earned.  I have no ability to cash those in because the access to my contest page was denied when they disqualified my home and I responded back with a complaint.  I have repeatedly asked for them to contact me directly so we can negotiate a settlement. They refuse.  A company should not be allowed to trick their customers like that.  I am wise enough to see through the facade and I want the compensation due to me for 2.5 years worth of SDG&E benefiting from my participation is this farce.  I would not have participated if I had known the truth - the truth that has been stated IN WRITING to me from SDG&E's own employees.  I think they are hoping that by ignoring my complaint that I will just go away.  I won't.  I can back up my statements by providing copies of the pages and pages of emails that I have which in fact, incriminate SDG&E of the accusations I make. I have attached a page with sample information that supports my facts.  This first is from an employee from Simple Energy - the company contracted to run the program for SDG&E.  She confirms that the tracking and points of the CONTEST are erroneous and that she will be trying to correct them.  That never happened.  The second is from a SDG&E employee who divulges the truth about the program - not a contest, a Behavioral Modification Program that treats people differently. She offers to trade in my points, but this was not offered again after I complained. The third portion of text is from the "Contest Rules" section as seen by entrants.  This clearly shows it to be a contest where people are treated as equals. They were not.  All I want is what is due to me- 2.5 years worth of compensation - what should be the honest way to reciprocate me for my time.  I am still open to receiving a phone call from an empowered SDG&E representative with a realistic and viable offer. ]  
Regards,
[redacted]

The company has reached out to the customer to discuss the complaint.

The company has been in telephone contact with Mr. [redacted] and is working with him to resolve his concern.

The full text of California Public Utility Commission approved Tariff Rule 3 may be located at:
http://regarchive.sdge.com/tm2/pdf/ELEC_ELEC-RULES_ERULE3.pdf
Rule 3.D provides for Joint and Several Liability for Service/Beneficial Use.
The rule reads in part (emphasis added):
Where two or more applicants join in one application or contract for Utility service, they shall be jointly and severally liable under the terms of the application/contract and shall be billed by means of a single periodic bill mailed to the customer designated to receive the bill. Whether or not the Utility obtained a joint application or contract for residential service, where there is evidence that an adult(s) other than the applicant resided at the premises and benefited from Utility service, the other adult(s) and the applicant shall be jointly and severally liable for service rendered while such other adults resided at the premises.
In compliance with Rule 3, the company is asking that the customer provide documentation to substantiate her residence during the time frame the outstanding charges were accrued. The company will not hold her responsible for the charges if she did not reside in the home. However, based on the evidence available to the company, the customer was a resident and as a resident, is responsible for the bill. The SDG&E Credit department can place the mom and the daughter together at several addresses either as residents or owners. This is about where [redacted] was living during the time the charges accrued, not about a Third Party Authorization.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait for the business to...

perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

Customer contacted.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I...

will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted] I spoke with a gentleman named [redacted], today at 2pm, he quoted the meter readings in kilowatts & megawatts  of usage, I told him that doing this, is a disservice to me, and any other customers to speak to me in terms I do not(he kept on stating this, despite my statement of non -understanding) understand, we both agreed that possibly aging apt. heaters, could have something to do with it. However, the times that he is quoting, regarding usage going up and down, does not make sense. Nor does this explain while my bills last year at this time were at $150-$180, and now they are $300.-Are they going to send me a Bill that is $600 next year, when it gets cold? I feel this is a simple extortion of my money by the SDGE monopoly. I pay my bill every month, as the amount is stated, I pay these bills under the most severe PROTEST, I fully expect the bill NOT be resolved, and wonder if the Bill will be $600 a month next year(extortion of profit at the customer's expense) My complaint stands, [redacted] just made things worse, the only good thing that came out of it is they are sending a meter reader(I explained this does NOT cost SDGE) to check the competence of their equipment. I  have concerns over a neighbor possibly tapping into my line, [redacted] said, to call the Police, I asked to the Police know how to check SDGE equipment? So I expect them to come by, and say nothing is wrong with the SDGE equipment, & still say $300 for a bill, I expect a $600 bill in Dec of 2016.

San Diego Gas and Electric will pursue collection action in compliance with Rule 11, Discontinuance of Service, filed with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
[redacted]
If Mr. [redacted] wishes to pursue his dispute, he may do so in accordance with CPUC Rule 10, Disputed Bills.
[redacted]

Unfortunately, San Diego Gas and Electric has made a decision that is not in the customer’s favor. The company will not be reimbursing costs for which the company is not responsible.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
If I wanted a malfunctioning nuclear power plant but I also wanted to throw silver dollars from a skyscraper in efforts to generate an electrical current as the coins gained speed, I would probably call the CPUC. Then we would ride our BMXes out in the street and take turns batting mailboxes and going to secret meetings in Poland.If I was an electrical monopoly that needed protection from consumers I would probably also refer complaints to the CPUC. However, I would definitely get GAP insurance on the nuclear plant*, and then charge consumers for non-electricity.Contrary to advice privately furnished to the Revdex.com by SDG&E on or about 2/19/2016, SDG&E has not responded to any recent correspondence, particularly because I have not sent any. The latest correspondence from SDG&E was received on Jan 5th, which is a day before I initiated my complaint through the Revdex.com. I have not heard from them since. I would like to add that fabrication to my growing list of unresolved complaints about SDG&E.I'm also confused by SDG&E's request that I "move forward with my complaint" by contacting the CPUC. I'm not sure what SDG&E would hope to accomplish through that medium that they could not accomplish in the last 3 months of sparse, short non-responses. It's not like doing easy, kind, legal things to resolve serious and reasonable customer complaints requires permission from the government.For the reasons noted previously, and some new ones, and mostly because SDG&E has done nothing to resolve this complaint, I respectfully request that the Revdex.com maintain this dispute open or downgrade SDG&E's rating from an absurd A+ to a fitting D- unless doing so would threaten the safety and continuity of Revdex.com of San Diego's power supply.I'd like to reiterate that SDG&E has not made any measurable effort in resolving or addressing any of the abuses noted in this complaint, and in the few words it has contributed to this process, consistently lied to the Revdex.com, misrepresented its policies and legal responsibilities, and incomprehensibly taken actions opposite to resolution.*Because those things lose value as soon a little radiation leaks out the containment shell.
Regards,
[redacted]

The program is a contest that encourages participants to save energy by rewarding them for reducing their energy usage. The rules and regulations and terms of use for the program were provided to this customer before she voluntarily enrolled.  As permitted by the contest rules, the zip code where the customer resides was removed from the program, preventing the customer from participating further.  The customer is entitled to any rewards earned prior to disenrollment.

Revdex.com:
I have...

reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I have copy of 3rd party notification form that is on SDGE website. This was signed by both myself and my mom and it does state that I can speak in regards to her but would not be financially responsible for the bills. The was sent to SDGE address and faxed. Now Ms [redacted] confirmed received last year but will not honor it. I was never a co applicant and this was also confirmed with Mrs [redacted]. I am requesting that my moms bill is not assigned to my account nor my credit. This is affecting my current service as well as my well being. My mom is ill and elderly that is why I was assisting her on her bill, never did I accept responsibility. I can supply this to Revdex.com. It should be illegal for anyone to assign any debt to anyone else with their only excuse is SDGE assumed that I used air conditioning and their heat. 
Regards,
[redacted]

[redacted]Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined...

that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
me and my spouse moved out of our apartment back in september 2016, my husband closed our SDG&E account on 09.12.2016 he paid the remaining balance of $17 and was advised the account is now closed with no other fees or charges. my husband got phone call from their credit department asking for a payment of $248 for the month of september. we didn't reside there the whole month and the account was paid and closed. now SDG&E is trying to intimidate us with a fictious bill, we refuse to be bullied as SDG&E has strongly demonstrated they threatened economic hardship. they call my husband from 858-696-1800 and speak with him as he has committed a crime when he calls customer service they can't even help the account is closed, SDG&E needs to answer as to why their employees try to intimidate and blackamail previous clients. we are beyond upset and are getting ready to hire legal help to take SDG&E to court for intimidation, blackmail and racketeering which all are illegal under state and federal laws.
Regards,
[redacted]

The company has been unable to reach the customer to discuss the concern. The customer may contact the company at [redacted]

A company supervisor contacted Ms. [redacted]. Payment arrangements were granted. The service was not interrupted.

In response to Mr. [redacted]'s concern, San Diego Gas and Electric's Claim's Manager contacted him on 9/24/15.
San Diego Gas and Electric respectfully requests that the Revdex.com complaint be closed.

The company contacted Mr. [redacted] with an explanation of the waiting period policy. A new refund check will be issued as soon as the stop payment on the previous check has been processed.

The company has been unable to reach the customer to discuss the concern. The customer may contact the company at [redacted].
Due to customer confidentiality, we are unable to provide a detailed response to the Revdex.com. However, the company responded to the complaint filed with the California Public Utilities Commission with a full accounting of the outstanding balance as well as the actions taken by the company.

The company has denied the claim as the customer has not validated her monetary request for compensation.

San Diego Gas and Electric has pursued collection action in compliance with Rule 11 filed with the California Public Utilities Commission.
[redacted]