FirstEnergy Corp.

The company stands by the initial response to the dispute and again notes that any recall from a final bill collection agency can take up to 60 days to recall.

I am rejecting this response because: The person whom is writing these responses is just writing and writing the same stuff to make themselves look productive.  Is Penelec trying to make a statement or something to that effect of a customer not agreeing with your Company and filing a complaint with the BCS? Also, I believe that the BCS numbers should not be listed on this document because they can be researched and my information be revealed.  I feel that the customer service level at Penelec is at all time low.  As you can see and read the responses from the Company in regards calling a customer rude, trying to throw it back in a customer's face of trying to file a complaint with a Government agency, additionally not being able to provide the very statements that are produced on a billing statement.  My initial resolution was asked for a supervisor to contact me in regards to the customer service issues that I am explaining to the Revdex.com.

Company stands by original response. The customer bills are correct as rendered. Per PUC approved ACT 129 company required to install Smart Meters at all homes. The customer meter will not be replaced with an old analog meter.  Company is no longer using analog meters due PUC ACT 129.Tell us why here...

I am rejecting this response because:  You admit there was a problem but yet won't pay for the damage caused by your negligence.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/01) */
On 07/28/2015, the customer called to apply for serviceDuring the application process, the Company discovered a large past due balance at the property she is signing for service atThe customer stated she moved into the property months
prior However she previously applied for service at this location on 06/26/and 05/11/and she is listed on the financial information for the current ratepayerHer application was denied for a copy of her lease/deed for the address applied for service, due to large premise balance, to see if applicant has any responsibility for premise balance Denial of service letter issuedShe was advised that service can be turned off on or after 08/11/if she doesn't comply to the terms of the applicationCustomer satisfied
On 09/01/the customer called for the fax number/email address to send her lease tothe customer was satisfied
Later that day the customer called to say her power as turned off and that she emailed her lease The company representative advised that the lease was received however it was incomplete and therefore unacceptableThe company representative also advised that her comply by date was 08/11/and that service could not be guaranteed after that time The customer asked if she could have an emergency restore The company representative advised that service will not be restored until requirements are met The customer said that the landlord turned off the service, the company representative advised it was our meter department who turned it off The customer was satisfied
On 09/02/the customer called to resubmit the lease The company representative reviewed the new lease and again it was incomplete and therefore not acceptable Based on the information that the company has already received and public records the application for service was denied due to the occupancy not changing at the locationThe customer was advised that the balance at the premise needs to be addressed before application is accepted The customer was satisfied
The company position is that the balance at the premise needs to be paid prior to accepting an application for service and having power restored

On 1/25/2016, customer called to apply for service as of
2/23/2016. He was advised of the required deposit and also offered the
guarantor option to waive the deposit. A guarantor form was sent to him to be
signed by him and the potential guarantor.
On2/02/2016, Company received the signed...

guarantor form back
from the customer. The person who signed the guarantor form does not meet
eligibility requirements to be a guarantor (due to payment history). A letter
was sent to the customer to call the Company.
On 3/04/2016, customer called and another guarantor form was
mailed to him, per his request.
On 3/09/2016, Company received signed guarantor form back
from customer. The person who signed the guarantor form does not meet
eligibility requirements (only had service with us for 8 months). Must have
service with us for 2 years or more as one of the requirements to be a
guarantor.
On 9/02/2016, customer called to question a high bill for
$281.65 for service from 8/03/2016 to 8/31/2016. He was advised that this is an
actual reading. The previous month was estimated and anything not billed on
that bill would appear on this actual reading bill. He wants someone to come
check this. Representative advised he could call back with a meter reading. He
was advised that July was very hot, which could cause the usage to increase. This
is first summer at this location. Customer hung up. PUC dispute rights were
mailed to the customer.
On 9/14/2016, Company obtained an actual reading of 95147.
Company’s position: The customer was charged a deposit of
$188.00 when he started service in his name at this location. This is two times
the average monthly bill at the property. The customer can use the guarantor
option to have the deposit waived. A guarantor is a co-signer. Part of the
qualifications to be a guarantor are that the customer has to currently have
service with Met-ed for two years and be in good standing with the Company. The
people that the customer presented to us to be a guarantor did not meet the
guarantor qualifications.
Regarding the customer questioning a high bill, the Company
obtained an actual reading on 8/31/2016 during our normal bimonthly meter
reading schedule. The Company obtained another meter reading on 9/14/2016, which
confirms that the meter has advanced and the bill is correct. The customer has used
552 kwh between 8/31/2016 and 9/14/2016, which is 37 kwh per day for 15 days.
This usage will produce a monthly bill of approximately 1100 kwh, or around
$150.00. The customer is questioning the bill for $281.65 from 8/03/2016 to
8/31/2016 (2174 kwh). This was an actual reading, which followed an estimated
bill of $129.97 from 7/02/2016 to 8/02/2016 (959 kwh). The average of these two
bill is 1566 kwh or $205.81 per month. This is the customer’s first summer at
this location. Air conditioning, along with extreme heat, can cause the usage
to increase. Based on the above information, the bills are correct as rendered.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/03) */
On 7/29/2015 the Customer contacted the Company wanting information concerning the rate. The customer was advised of the rate per kwh. The customer provided a meter reading of 61003. The Customer's meter reading was entered for monthly billing....

The Customer was satisfied.
On 8/24/2015 the Customer contacted the Company regarding pending termination notice. All factors were considered and all options provided to prevent termination. The customer was advised that the amount needed to stop termination is $429.26. The Customer expressed inability to pay and dispute rights were issued placing a hold on the account until 9/8/2015.
The customer's most recent bill was issued on 8/27/2015 for an amount due of $647.63. This included past due balance of $429.26 plus current charges of $218.39 which included $164 budget plus $55 payment agreement minus $0.63 security deposit interest.
The customer has accumulated arrears which has resulted in a past due amount carrying over each month. The customer is not paying the full amount due monthly. This has resulted in the customer receiving bills for $600 plus.
The customer has a payment agreement of $55 plus budget bill that began on 7/23/2015.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/04/26) */
The customer is on the Equal Payment Plan, aka budget. The Equal Payment Plan is a budget program for residential customers. The budget is available to residential customers as a way to ease the budgeting of their utility bill. This plan allows...

the customer to pay approximately the same amount each month in an effort to level out the high/low seasonal billings and also so the customer will not have to pay the total bill amount at that time. The budget amount is calculated based off of the recent twelve month usage history and may adjust during periodic review (typically every three months) or during the customer's end of year true-up period (the end of the budget year/actual amount due). The longer the customer is at the residence, the more the budget will reflect the customer's usage. If the customer uses more, the budget may raise. If the usage lowers, the budget may lower. When the customer is on the budget, the customer is responsible for paying the budget amount, not the actual account balance/actual usage at that time. At the end of the year during the true up period for the budget, the remaining actual account balance (difference from being on the budget) becomes due at that time.
In the last EPP payments, the customer has been billed $2149.78. The EPP payments have covered $1278 leaving a difference of $871.78. The EPP has increased to cover this balance.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/04/27) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The price keeps going up and they have taken away any incentive programs such a heating options and budget plans for those of us that have switched to all electric. The price of coal, oil and natural gas is very low and is the key component in generating electro but the bills continue to rise we have had smart meters shoved down our throats and when you complain you get told to deal with it but they have taken all incentive programs away it is highway robbery

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/27) */
[redacted]'s service with Ohio Edison ended effective 09/08/14. The final bill was issued 09/23/14 in the amount of $65.30 due 10/07/14. Final bills that are not paid/left outstanding are sent to a collection agency 30 days after the due...

date.
On 08/04/15, [redacted] contacted the company and paid the outstanding bill of $65.30. As a courtesy to Ms. [redacted], the company has reached out to the collection agency to have the debt removed from her credit report. This can take up to 60-90 days.

Ohio Edison records show the account in the name of [redacted]. January 5, 2017, [redacted] advised that [redacted] passed away. [redacted]
advised she would be sending a copy of the death certificate to have the
account changed to the Estate of [redacted].  Ohio Edison has no record...

of receiving a copy
of the death certificate, therefore the account remained in the name of [redacted]. There was no further contact
from anyone on the account until August 9, 2017, at which time [redacted] requested
a cancellation of service.  The final
bill reflected a credit of $20.56, which was refunded in the name of [redacted]. Ohio Edison refunds are issued by Citibank in the form of a debit card.
The information included with the debit cards provides a phone number customers
can call to request a paper check. A supervisor spoke with [redacted] 10/2/17 and
explained Ohio Edison did not receive a death certificate, therefore the refund
issued in the name on the account, which is [redacted] will need to with Citibank to provide
the death certificate and have the name on the refund changed.

08/18/16 - A termination notice was issued in the amount
of $2539.75 scheduled on or after 09/01/16.
 
08/25/16 @ 12:09 PM  - The
Company attempted to contact the Customer by phone.  A message was left. The Company attempted to
reach the Customer again by phone on...

08/26/16 @ 05:02 PM. A message was left.
 
09/01/16 - Customer's service was terminated for nonpayment.  A post termination notice was left at the
property.
 
09/01/16 - Customer contacted the Company regarding termination of
service. All factors were considered. 
All options were provided. The amount the Customer was quoted for
restoral included past due balance of $2571.75 and $32.00 reconnect fee for a
total amount of $2603.75.   Customer
expressed the opinion that the billing is incorrect.  The Company advised that the residence is an all-electric
location that uses electric heating.  The
usage historically increases through the winter months.  Customer advised that she felt the account
should have a credit of $1000.  Company advised
that the location was using the electric. 
The usage has decreased recently. 
Company mailed a billing statement to the Customer which detail the
amounts billed and the amounts paid. 
 
09/02/16 – Customer made the requested payment and an order to restore
the service was created.
 
09/02/16 – service was restored.
 
 
Company position:
The bill is correct as rendered. 
The Customer’s residence uses electric heat.  Historically, this causes the usage to
increase during the winter months.  The
usage for the last 12 months has decreased from the previous year by 10,000
kilowatt hours.  The balances were not
paid in full and by the due date and a disconnect notice was issued.  Two attempts were made to contact the
customer.  The Company had no contact
from the Customer until service was disconnected. 
Tell us why here...

I am rejecting this response because:I did not hang up the phone it was disconnected after they transferred me to a customer service rep that clearly stated she could NOT help me and didn't understand why they would transfer me to her in the first place.  When she transferred me back was when the call disconnected.  At no time did I receive a letter and I called a few times before the 11-8 call to talk about my account and making sure that I was making the correct amount of payments to not go through what I did the previous heating season.  No one at any time mentioned a security deposit if they were looking to put me on one.  I can not afford to pay another 500 on a bill I already paid all because you choose to collect a security deposit.

Company records show Toledo Edison received request for EHEAP appointment hold 11/3/16, which placed hold on the customer's account until 11/11/16.  The hold is placed for 5 business days after the EHEAP appointment date. Customer is not eligible for a second EHEAP appointment hold. Only one...

permitted per EHEAP season. Customer was issued a disconnect in the amount of $98.06 due by 11/23/16.  Customer was granted additional 10 day notice, extending the due date to 12/5/16. Payment or pledge of $98.06 required by 12/5/16 to guarantee service.

The service at the address provided [redacted]) is currently on as of 3-31-16.  There is no outstanding balance and the Company the does not have an applicant for service.

On 07/26/16, [redacted] contacted the company to end
service in her name at this address, effective 08/01/17.
 
On 08/03/17, the final bill was issued to a mailing address
of [redacted], [redacted] with a final bill account balance
of $95.53, with no...

returned mail.
 
On 08/15/16, a payment of $31 was received, bringing the
balance to $64.53. When a final bill balance remains unpaid, the account is
sent to collections. The outstanding remaining final balance of $64.53 sent to
collections was/is valid.
 
On 06/21/17, Ms. [redacted] contacted the company and paid the
remaining outstanding balance of $64.53, clearing the balance.

As a matter of background, the customer is on a payment plan for arrearages due to a high budget true up plus a past due balance.  The customer was already on a payment plan in order to pay back a back balance when the high true up occurred; on 4/19/2016, a company representative agreed to...

reset the payment plan to include the budget true up and an additional past due balance.  The terms of the payment plan are budget + $16.00 toward the arrears.  The customer also has an alternate electric generation supplier who's charges cannot be put on budget(the supplier's charges are billed per kWh).In regard to the company's budget program(known as the Equal Payment Plan or EPP); it is a program for residential customer designed to make monthly payment consistent throughout the entire year, leveling out seasonal highs and lows. The EPP amounts are based on a 12 month average bill and are reviewed every 3 months; during the 12th month, the anniversary(true up) bill is issued.  The true up will be for the difference between what the customer has been charged during the previous 11 months and the actual cost of the energy the customer used for that period.  If the customer receives a high true up bill, the company will offer a payment plan.On 6/29/2016, a security deposit warning letter was issued.  The letter explained a deposit would be billed to the account if payments continued to be received late.A deposit of $800.00 was charged to the account; the deposit appeared on the bill invoiced on 10/31/2016.   A message appeared on the invoice explaining that as a result of unsatisfactory payment history , a security deposit has been billed the account.  The message also explains the customer could be eligible for payment options and refers the customer to the company.On 11/8/2016, the customer contacted the company to discuss the deposit.  The customer asked the company representative if a waiver or if a payment plan was available.  The customer was transferred to a Credit and Collections representative to discuss the deposit.  A Credit and Collections representative confirmed the deposit was charged due to unsatisfactory payment history and further explained the deposit would not be waived.  The customer was offered a payment plan; however, it appears the customer decline and requested a Supervisor.  It does not appear the customer stayed on the line for a transfer to a Supervisor to be completed.    [redacted]The Company may require a security deposit according to regulation for the following reasons:Delinquent accountsIf two consecutive bills have not been paid in fullif three or more bill were not paid within five days of the due date in the preceding 12 months.If the customer dos not comply with the terms of a payment agreement.Deposits are calculated equal to 1/6 of the customer's annual bill.The customer does not pay on time/in full and is consistently delinquent.The deposit request is valid.The deposit cannot be removed.

Customer moved into location 07/29/16 with an on read of [redacted].  Company obtained scheduled read 08/03/16 at [redacted] indicating 502 kWh had been consumed between actual reads.  Customer provided read on 08/10/16 at [redacted] indicates that Company read meter correctly on 08/03/16 and bill...

is correct as rendered.  Account balance of $195.66 ($51.66 usage charges + $144 security deposit billed on intitial bill) with a due date of 08/25/16.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/05/19) */
05/04/16 - customer contacted the company concerning a payment in the amount of $82 submitted on 04/28/16. The company advised that the payment was returned on 05/02/16. Customer questioned why the funds did not come out of the account...

instantly? Company advised that it can take one to three days for the funds to come out of the customer's account. Customer was advised that a payment of $82 would need to be made in cash or credit card to remove the threat of disconnection. Customer requested additional time to make the payment. Company advised that additional time is not available. Customer was advised that due to returned payments, the option to pay by check online will not be available. The customer ended the call.
The payment of $82 posted to the account on 06/06/16 clearing the returned payment.
The company does request payments from the customer be made with cash or credit/debit card.
A waiver for the returned payment fee is not available.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/01/05) */
Revdex.com case #[redacted] - [redacted]
Shared metering request opened 3/16/2013 for property at [redacted]. Customer contacted by meter department a number of times and letter issued regarding scheduling an appointment for...

proof of shared metering or for the customer to provide proof that he no longer owns property. Customer failed to respond to Company therefore service for this property was placed in his name as of last actual meter reading and tenant's balance of $838.53 was transferred to the customer new account [redacted].
Written utility report issued to the customer on 3/29/2013 advising that due to his failure to comply with the Company's requests to investigate the service at this property was placed in his name, Copy attached.
On 09/11/2013 customer said no shared metering at property. Representative created shared metering notification and left message with the owner [redacted] III to contact meter department to schedule appointment. Customer was given until 10/1/2013 to schedule appointment and written utility report issued
09/17/2013 Company representative left a message with meter service telephone to call back to schedule appoint for verification of shared metering
09/20/2013 - customer called and said the shared metering issue at [redacted] does not exist. Representative sent request to meter service department to scheduled appointment with customer. He stated that we took his tenant's word for the shared metering at the property but we are now saying that we have to investigate before removing the coding. I advised that the service was placed in his name due his non compliance to the Company numerous requests. Customer said that the prior tenant, Kara Ramey, called and stated that her uncle was running an extension cord and no shared metering existed. Advised customer shared metering needs to be investigated. A hold was placed on his account pending the shared metering appointment and investigation.
09/24/2013 - Meter service representative called the customer and left a message regarding shared metering investigation. Advised he has until 10/1/2013 to comply with Company's request otherwise the service will remain in his name and coded to reflect shared metering.
Shared metering representative noted customer was called on 9/11, 9/17, 9/17 and 9/20/13 regarding shared metering appointment needed. And called by meter services on 09/12 & 09/24/13 and owner has not responded.
According to Company records the customer finally scheduled an appointment for shared metering at [redacted] on 12/19/2013. Meter representative states no foreign load/shared metering found at this time. Meter [redacted] only serves[redacted]. Written utility report was issued to the customer on 12/31/2013 advising of this however also advising the customer that due to his failure to comply with the Company's numerous requests he is still responsible for all consumption charges from 3/2/2013 to 12/31/2013 for total of $970.95. Copy of UR included.
On 1/7/2014, the customer called regarding being held responsible for charges at [redacted], [redacted] dating back to March of 2013 when this service went into his name. I explained that due to the customer not complying with our requests to investigate the report of shared metering at this property he was held responsible for the charges. He stated that he was never notified that there was an issue at [redacted], [redacted]. Representative advised of numerous contacts via telephone and written utility reports issued. Customer did not respond and still insisted that he was not aware of the shared metering issue at this property. The customer was provided with all I information in order to file a complaint with the PUC.
According to the Company's records the account [redacted] was in the customer's name from 3/2/2013 to 4/1/2014. Final account balance owing from this property was $1235.40.
Company's procedure regarding final account unpaid balances is to transfer all customer unpaid final account balances to like accounts in the customer's name.
Company records indicated on 6/29/2015 the above addressed balance of $1235.40 was transferred to the customer's active account at [redacted]. Copy of account statement shows balance transfer.
Company's final position is that the customer is responsible for the final outstanding balance of $1235.40 from [redacted], [redacted].

A line crew pulled the pole at [redacted], this morning 09/21/17.