FirstEnergy Corp.

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/06/14) */ An installment was accepted on the account by the customer on 3-7-to pay a down payment of by 3-8-and the remaining balance in installments of plus the current bill for monthsThe down payment was received 3-7-of The next bill issued 3-23-for with a due date of 4-12-No payment was received in AprilThe next bill issued 4-21-for a total due of (past due and current bill of 198.65) due 5-11-A payment of was received 5-10-This was not the full amount due, therefore a termination notice issued 5-31-for (catch up on IP 198.53) with a termination date on or after 6-7-A payment of was received 6-13- The account remains past due for that was due 6-9- Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2016/06/15) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Yes I may owe a bill but this does not explain why they are so inconsiderate of there customersIf you call them and try to get an extension let's say for a week from whatever date because you don't get paid until then and dont have the money right now they will tell you we don't allow extensions and will come out and shut off your electricThey are not willing to help their customers other than offering an installment plan in which when you get on you still have to make a payment that dayYes I know it is our responsibility to pay our bill on time but when you need a little help you need a little help and they just don't care if you do Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2016/06/16) */ An installment plan on an account is splitting up a past due balance over future bills, also known as an extension Reviewed customer's account history and in the last months Company has granted the customer installment plans on past due balances and formal extensions to pay past due balances Customer may be eligible for utility assistance and should apply at local DHHR office or by calling WV Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 11, 2016/06/17) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Yes these are installment plans not extensionsI have called before to get a couple days EXTENSION and was told no it either had to be paid or was going to be offNot all people can just walk into the DHHR and get assistanceSome of the people that work for this company are the most unprofessional acting people I have ever spoken withI was off work one time for a couple months due to an injury and had not received my workers comp check yet to pay any of my bills and I called in to tell them I had a hardship and was not able to pay until I got my check and I was told that they could not help me that it had to be paid or shut offSo I was told no extensions and now they say they offer extensions other than installment plans is that correctSo when I have to call in and get an extension there shouldn't be a problemLike if my bill is due and won't have the money until my pay date there won't be an issue with that extension

MrRubins concerns have been noted and notifications for the work require have been created [redacted] , Prior orders for this light had to be rescheduled do to emergency work

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me given that Penelec will be giving me a bill credit every month of $based on the 3% monthly interest rate taken on the $deposit

A disconnection notice was issued 9/27/for the amount of $with a block date of 10/11/ 10/05/- Customer called regarding a disconnection noticeCompany representative requested amount of $before 10/11/to stop termination and provided all options to stop termination, per Customer advised she would be making payment for the disconnection amount on Friday (10/07/She was satisfied 10/12/- Service was disconnected due to nonpayment of billPost termination notice was posted 10/12/- Customer called regarding disconnection of serviceShe stated she had made the payment on 10/08/and did not want to pay the reconnection feeShe was transferred to a supervisor A? supervisor spoke with customer about payment she made on 10/08/at agencyCustomer was advised she had not called to provide receipt number as proof of payment therefore we were not aware the payment had been madeCustomer stated she wanted her service restored immediatelyThe supervisor advised a reconnection fee of $needed to be paid first and the deposit could be billed due to the situationThe customer was advised restoration timeframe of 1-daysCustomer disconnected the callNo payment was made Still on 10/12/- Customer called back to make payment of $by credit cardThe representative got supervisor approval to not assess the security deposit and a reconnection order was created to restore within 1-daysShe was satisfied 10/13/- Customer's boyfriend contacted the Company via our websiteHe was upset about service being disconnected and how they were treatedA representative responded back via email that payment had been received a reconnection order had been created to restore within 1-daysRegarding the report of the representative/supervisor's rudeness, this incident has been reported to the their supervisor for investigation and follow up as appropriate? As stated above, the customer was advised payment needed to be received before 10/11/Customer stated she would be making the payment Friday (10/07/16)Unfortunately she had not called to provide receipt number to stop disconnection and service was disconnected Customer paid reconnection fee 10/12/16, reconnection order was created and service was restored 10/13/16.?

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 6, 2015/10/15) */ Ohio Edison investigation confirms [redacted] living at this address since 11/OE has agreed to grant her service effective 11/12/She would need to pay $4369.30, which includes usage from 11/12/to current ($1711.85) + $ which is her PIPL default/gap total or she can wait until 10/19/and use the $winter reconnect rule to get service transferred into her name and have the remaining $4,billed

I am rejecting this response because: Weeds were taken down and disposed of same day letter was receivedThe complaint was not started by me but I am owed money from overpayingOhio Edison had had several people here and investigated this matterEvery time I call for an update I am told it is not done which is untrue if they have been hereI've talked to them personallyOhio Edison has lied from the start of thisThis is a mix up from Ohio Edison not by a customerIf a customer is owed money you expect payment immediateBut you drag it in when you owe a customer moneyI've spoke with an attorney regarding this

Tell us why here Potomac Edison received the solar application from Vivint Solar Developer via email on 2/2/for this customerThe application fee of $was posted/received on 2/17/15, the job was then placed in queue for the application reviewConditional approval was granted on 3/19/15; with the statement that a service upgrade to replace secondary service conductors would be needed to support the solar arrayInstructions were provided to Vivint on how to apply for the required upgrade.? Potomac Edison received request for? a work order? in July 2015.? ? Contact was not made with Vivint pm10/1/15, invoice was issued on 10/1/and was paid on 11/1/According to? Company Designer, the job stood idle for a while and then contact was made with Nicholas Petkovic of Vivint to clarify some confusion with regard to the required upgradeIt was explained the customer/installer is responsible for installing the underground conduit to complete the service upgradeVivint was in contact with a company named Tallon to do the trenching for the jobPotomac Edison is awaiting word from Tallon and/or Vivint that the trenching has been complete in order to release the job to scheduling to complete the upgradeOnce that is done the job will be released for the meter exchange

The interaction between Mr [redacted] and the Company IVR was pulled and reviewed The IVR advised Mr [redacted] that it matched his telephone number to his account The IVR asked Mr [redacted] to confirm his address began with [redacted] and Mr [redacted] confirmed this Both accounts have the same telephone number listed ( [redacted] ***) and they both have the same address The Company IVR is designed to look for the Premise Number (address number) and tie that to an Active Account, if the customer does not enter an account number, which the account number was not enteredThe customer’s telephone number is listed in the Premise Number field on account [redacted] and because that account was the active account at the time of the call, the Company IVR matched the call to that account The Company IVR worked as designed The Company stands by its position

As information: Customer’s meter had been registering zero usage since approximately 08/23/As a result, customer was being billed the minimum charge of $monthlyA meter can register zero usage if location is vacant and service rarely being used or is meter is stopped/dead A zero usage letter was mailed to the customer, advising the customer to contact the companyCustomer did not respond to letter On 09/27/17, the company installed a new meterOn 10/26/17, the company obtained a reading of from the new meterThe prior removed meter had stopped, thus the reason for the zero usage On 11/10/17, the company billing department rebilled the customer’s account for the time frame of 12/22/to 09/25/to bill for some timeframe of the stopped meter On 11/16/17, a payment agreement of $monthly + current charge was set up on the balance of $ Customer is responsible for the rebilling from when the meter was stopped

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/06/02) */ Customer was assessed a deposit due to late payment history; the customer has not made full payment or payment arrangements for any given bill containing a previous balance for regulated service provided by that utility company The amount of $was determined based on 130% of the estimated annual average monthly bill for the customer's tariffed service for the ensuing twelve monthsCustomer enrolled in direct debit and was granted a one time waiver of the deposit 6/1/

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/06/03) */ Customer was issued disconnect notice in the amount of $for charges that were due 4/28/Customer is issued a billing each month A review of the monthly billings reflects a past due balance each monthWhen the bill issued 5/13/16, customer was billed $185.60, of which $was past due and $was current charges due 5/27/ A copy of the bill is attached Payment of $was received 5/31/ Customer currently has a past due balance of $ A new bill is scheduled to issue 6/13/ A statement of account is also attached showing all charges and payments for the past months

Customer started service at this location effective 12/23/ On 06/13/the company replaced the analog meter with a Smart Meter Per PUC approved ACT company required to install Smart Meters at all homesThe smart Meter installed was tested before installed, tested accurate Light Load % and Full Load 100.02% 01/23/Customer contacted the company concerning the bill for $for service from 12/22/to 01/19/The company advised billed to an actual reading (read 5954)The company explained this actual reading followed the previous scheduled estimated billingThe company explained this bill would pick up any difference from the previous estimate Customer insisted on having the meter testedThe company advised of the $meter test feeMeter removed 01/24/with a read of and sent to be tested Meter read of confirms previous company read on 01/19/of is correct Consumption from 01/19/to 01/24/total of kWh for days/ average of kWh per day Meter tested on 01/27/and tested accurate Light Load 99.91% and Full Load % A another Smart Meter was installed on 01/24/when meter sent to be testedThe new meter set was tested prior to being installed This meter also tested accurate Light Load 100.01% and Full Load 100.03%Meters within FirstEnergy territory are scheduled to be read one month and estimated the followingThe company has read the meter bi-monthly as scheduledThe company utilizes two methods of estimation to calculate usage when the meter is not readOne method is Linear Weighting estimation, which is based off of the usage from the same period the prior year and the next method is Enhanced estimation, which is based off of the usage the prior year "or" the prior month, plus a weather correcting factorMost residential customers are calculated with Enhanced estimationThe method chosen is an automated processIf under or over estimated, the usage is caught and billed/corrected with the next actual readingThe customer has the option of contacting the company with a customer reading on the estimated billing monthsAs a result, the customer would be billed one month using the company actual reading and one month using the customer's actual readingThere is a statement on each bill detailing when the next bill will be issued and whether or not that bill will be an actual or estimated billing monthIf the next billing is scheduled to be an estimated billing month, then a time frame is given as to when the customer should contact the company with the customer readingThe company is willing to accept and does encourage customers to provide the company with a customer reading when the bill is estimatedThis will even out the customer's billings by eliminating the estimationThis is the customer first full winter at this location The 01/19/billing appeared higher ($239.22) due to picking up any difference from the previous estimated bill ($51.09) From 11/21/to 01/19/actual read, total consumption kWh for days/ average of kWh per dayConsumption from 01/19/to 01/24/total of kWh for days/ average of kWh per dayThe customer bills are correct as renderedThe meters tested accurate and the company read on 01/24/confirm previous read was correctStatement of account is attachedTell us why here

A summary of the events that took place on November 2, 2017: ? Company records show a report of no lights? at 4:PM.? Ohio Edison had a fuse outage with an animal contact at pole 52-99.? Estimated restoration time was set at 8:PM.? All customers were restored at 8:PM.? ? Line Manager tried to contact this customer on Friday, December 1, and Monday, December by phone and also stopped at his residence.? Customer did not return calls and was not at home or did not answer the door

The customer reported an outage to the Company on 3/5/ The customer's outage is related to several major storms in the area that caused extensive tree, pole and wire damage We have more than 1,JCP&L linemen, damage assessors, hazard responders, forestry personnel, dispatchers and contractors are working to restore customer outagesIn addition, more than line workers from other FirstEnergy utilities and contractors are on-site or in transit to assist with restoration efforts in New Jersey High winds made initial restoration efforts challenging due to safety concerns for crews using bucket trucksHeavy, wet snow caused additional outages and also prevented access to some damage locationsJCP&L crews and other personnel continued to work round-the-clock to make repairs and deploy resources as needed until all work was been completed and customers were restored

FirstEnergy is the parent company of Penelec.? When a customer signs up for service, we are required to offer them their option to choose an alternate supplier, as Penelec does not generate electricity.? The customer can decline this option, however, in this case, the customer chose to choose an alternate supplierThe supplier they are with is Green Mountain Energy In doing so, this results in company names appearing on the monthly charges.? Penelec for Distribution and Green Mountain Energy for GenerationIf the customer did not choose an alternate supplier, then Penelec would show for both the distribution and the generationGenerally speaking, the generation portion of the bill is about 60% of the total bill ? The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) is the governing body of PenelecEverything Penelec does is approved by themIn accordance with Chapter (2), the company may estimate usage every other monthThe company does attempt to read all meters as scheduled, however sometimes there are circumstances beyond our control e.gaccess, storm restoration, extreme weather conditions, work stoppage, emergencies etcThe customer has options on months when the bill is estimated.? The customer may provide readings by calling the Company or on the internet at [redacted] Estimates for residential customers are calculated using the prior year or the prior month, plus a weather correcting factor ? The customer has been set up on payment plans to assist in paying the past due balance.? Any additional payment plans would need to be granted by the PUC ? All credit and/or debit card payments are processed by a 3rd party and they charge a processing feeOnce the payment is made through them, the customer can contact Penelec back with the confirmation number to proceed with all other transactions.? The customer also has the option of paying at? local payment agency and they also charge a processing fee.? The customer also has the option of mailing in a payment.? The customer can also pay using a bank routing and account number with Penelec and there is not a processing fee for that ? The customer chose to pay with a check over the phone on 03/21/2018.? The electronic check was submitted to the bank on 03/21/2018.? On 03/28/the company was notified that the check was not able to be processed due to insufficient fundsThe customer also submitted another payment on 04/05/2018.? The electronic check was submitted to the bank on 04/05/On 04/12/the company was notified that the check was not able to be processed due to insufficient funds.? When an electronic check is made, it is processed the same day.? It there is insufficient funds, the company will attempt to cash again as long as the bank allows.? The time frame between these attempts varies.? The customer would need to contact their bank in regard to the payments being returned as insufficient funds if he feels this reason is incorrectThe bank would also be able to address the time frames and number of times a check can try to be cashed when returned for insufficient funds ? The customer does have to make good on the account and pay the account current to avoid termination ? As a matter of background, the customer also has an open case with the PUC and they will complete their own investigation

The billing of the security deposit in question is applicable because of the lateness of payment on the customer's accountThe deposit will be refunded when months of bills are paid on time, or the customer finals the account Interest is applied monthlyThe Company did attempt to explain and offer an installment plan but the records indicate the customer hung up(10/30)Below are the applicable BPU ( Board of Public Utility) approved regulationsDeposit regulations: Company's request for deposit is in compliance with NJAC 14:3-Deposits for service (d) and company tariff section (a) A utility may require a reasonable deposit as a condition of supplying service, in accordance with this section (d) A utility may require an existing customer to furnish a deposit or increase their existing deposit if the customer fails to pay a bill within days after the due date printed on the billThe deposit required shall be in an amount sufficient to secure the payment of future bills Guarantee of Payment: Where the credit of an Applicant for Service is impaired or not established, or where the credit of a Customer has become impaired, a money deposit or other guarantee satisfactory to the Company may be required as security for the payment of bills for Service before the Company will commence or continue Service

Company records do not indicate the customer called to cancel the service at the location on 7-2- The account was closed on 10-20-when the customer called on 10-19-to cancel the serviceThe property owner has the option to contact the Company and take responsibility for the electric service as of 7-2- Corrections can then be processed on the account to end service in the customer's name as of the date if the property owner takes responsibilityThank you,

The customer reported an outage to the Company on 3/2/18.? ? The customer's outage is related to several major storms in the area that caused extensive tree, pole and wire damage.? We have more than 1,JCP&L linemen, damage assessors, hazard responders, forestry personnel, dispatchers and contractors are working to restore customer outagesIn addition, more than line workers from other FirstEnergy utilities and contractors are on-site or in transit to assist with restoration efforts in New Jersey.? High winds made initial restoration efforts challenging due to safety concerns for crews using bucket trucksHeavy, wet snow caused additional outages and also prevented access to some damage locationsJCP&L crews and other personnel continued to work round-the-clock to make repairs and deploy resources as needed until all work was been completed and customers were restoredAn engineer will contact the customer regarding his reliability concerns

Customer's complaint concerns an outage that occurred in Tionesta on Saturday 2017-07-at 12:The Tionesta area is serviced by Penelec’s Oil City district There were multiple outages affecting the Oil City district on Saturday 2017-07-29; outages occurred between 2017-07-at 08:and 2017-07-at 00:00, including calls from local dispatch and multiple outages involving broken poles/equipment and trees on Penelec lines, requiring additional resources to address the outages The outages were prioritized in accordance with protocal to address outages involving hazardous situations with priority over nonhazardous outages Estimated Times of Restoration for the Strandberg outage would have been updated to account for the other outages Prior to the outage affecting customer, on 2017/07/at 10:an outage had been reported in the Cranberry area that involved a tree on primary wires and a broken cross arm The line operations troubleman responded and determined that a crew was needed for repairs and notified the supervisor The Cranberry outage required tree and line crews for repair The troubleman was then dispatched to the Tionesta area to respond to an outage that was identified on 2017/07/at 11:08, which was reported by a dispatcher concerning a tree burning on a primary wire The troubleman performed switching, removed trees and restored at 14: The outage affecting Customer in Tionesta was identified on Saturday 2017-07-at 12:37.The troubleman was directed to investigate the outage affecting Customer since he was already in the Tionesta area.The troubleman was dispatched to investigate the outage and arrived at 15:11.The troubleman identified that a transformer had failed, that a crew and parts were needed for repair, and informed the supervisorAlso, on 2017/07/at 11:an additional outage had been reported in the Clintonville area The troubleman left the Tionesta (Strandberg) outage site, and proceeded to respond the Clintonville outage; restored at 17:In addition, an outage was reported in Titusville by Crawford County at 16: The outage involved safety forces on site, broken poles and Penelec live wires down The troubleman was dispatched from Clintonville to the Titusville outage and arrived at 19: The outage required crews for repairAn additional outage was reported in Oil City on 2017-07-at 17: The troubleman responded to the outage and made repairs; restored 2017-07-at 22: Another outage was reported in Sandycreek at 18:01; the troubleman was dispatched to that outage; restored at 23:The troubleman was then dispatched back to the outage affecting Customer on 2017/07/at 23:with additional crew and made repairs for that outage; repairs completed on 2017/07/at 02:25.Company position is the outages were prioritized in accordance with protocal to address outages involving hazardous situations with priority over nonhazardous outages Estimated Times of Restoration for the Strandberg outage would have been updated to account for the other outages

7/13/- Customer called to dispute the $credit card feeA resolution specialist explained it is a fee that the vendor charges of which could not be changedThe customer was offered readypay (electronic payment) and also auto credit card payment however the customer refused the options and stated he always paid by credit cardThe resolution specialist advised the customer the fee was always in effectThe customer wanted the phone number for corporateThe resolution specialist advised it would not change anything and went to ask customer to hold while she saw if a manage was available however the call was disconnectedThe resolution specialist attempted to call customer back but there was no answerA dispute right letter was issuedCustomer called back 7/13/and spoke with a supervisor in regards to the $credit card feeThe supervisor explained it was a vendor fee and offered other payment optionsThe customer stated he could not do the other options and wanted to speak with someone higherThe supervisor advised she would have her manager call him backHe was not satisfied, but declined rightsStill on 7/13/16, A manager called the customer in regards to the $credit card feeCustomer felt we were charging too much for him to pay by credit cardCustomer refused the other payment options offeredPUC information was provided and customer stated he already contacted themCustomer stated he wanted to speak with someone in Corporate7/14/16, Case received7/14/16, A corporate representative spoke with the customer in regards to the $credit card feeShe advised the $fee is a third party fee but we offer other methods of payment and explained them, includingthat a check by phone is free.All First Energy Residential customer's are charged a $fee when payment by credit cardThe fee is charged by the vendor that handles the credit card payments.Customer can enrolled in the Recurring Credit card program where the payment is automatically applied on the customer's credit card and there is no associated fee