FirstEnergy Corp.

The lights in question were repaired 9/19.  Our Operations Manager left a message for the customer with his direct phone contact for any open items..

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/02/01) */
The company has no record that the customer was doubled billed $34.98, as stated. The customer also has not contacted the company to dispute/discuss.
Customer is enrolled with an Alternate Supplier, Constellation Energy Services, Inc.
On...

the 01/26/16 billing, customer was charged/billed $34.48 company current charge and $34.98 Constellation Energy Services current charge, totaling $69.46, due 02/09/16.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/02/02) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I never enrolled with Alternate Supplier, Constellation Energy Services, Inc. and demand a refund for the $34.98.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2016/02/03) */
Customer has been enrolled with Constellation Energy Services, Inc., since 08/21/15. A letter was also issued to the customer advising receipt of Constellation Energy Services enrollment. If the customer is disputing charges from the supplier, the customer must contact Constellation Energy Services, Inc. The company cannot speak on behalf of the supplier or their charges.
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 11, 2016/02/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/01/25) */

Dear Mr. [redacted]:
We recommend you check with your contractor on the status of the application paperwork for your solar system.
The New Jersey Administrative Code N.J.A.C. 14:8-5 (Interconnection of Class 1 Renewable Energy Systems)...

outlines a review process for the Utility that involves a series of applications, inspections and documents to be submitted by the contractor/customer to the utility before a meter is changed to a bi-directional meter in support of an interconnection solar system.
There are two steps involved with the approval process of a solar system, (Part 1 & Part 2), before the bi-directional meter can be installed. Each Part requires the contractor/customer to submit applications to the utility along with specific related documentation.
Part 1 application is an "Approval to Install" which allows the contractor to install the solar equipment. RECEIVED
Part 2 application is an "Approval to Operate" which allows the contractor to turn on the solar system, and at this time JCP&L will automatically schedule the installation of the bi-directional meter. NOT RECEIVED
As of this writing our records show we have only received PART 1 of the approval process, please contact your contractor and have them submit the additional required paperwork. NOTE: If your installed solar system is currently running please turn it off immediately until we receive the appropriate documentation, electrical inspection and the "approval to operate" letter has been issued.
Mr. has been advised
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/01/26) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I have contacted the NJ State CleanEnergy Office and they are 13-16 weeks behind schedule.
The answer to my complaint did not respond to my complaint of poor customer relations. I can't phathom why I should be contacting the STATE when it should be JCP&L as well as Trinity Solar
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2016/02/03) */
NJ State Clean Energy is the correct State Regulated Entity. We do apologize for Mr. [redacted]'s delay however this is not an issue that JCPL would correct for him. We are following proper procedure for installation and billing of solar devices, and had advised the customer accordingly.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2016/02/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It's the old adage "it's not our fault"

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/17) */
Customer is on the PIPP program for $43 monthly. A disconnect notice was issued in the amount of $172 with a termination due date of 11/24/15. On 11/20/15, an additional 10 day notice was given verbally with a new termination due date of...

12/4/15. On 12/19/15, service was terminated for non-payment. Last payment received on 08/4/15.
On 12/16/15 at 10:53, Medical certificate was received, order to restore was processed and service has been restored.
Customer has one more Medical Certificate available. Customer has used two to date, 08/13/15 and 12/16/15. At this time, account has a collection hold until 01/15/16.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/08/10) */
[redacted] obtained service at [redacted] in her name on 4/21/2015. The service was established with account number [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] contacted the company on 5/20/2015 and requested service...

out of her name as of 5/27/2015. The customer was issued a final bill, which was the only bill issued to the customer, for service from 4/21/2015 to 5/27/2015 with a balance due of $150.65.
On 7/30/2015, Ms. [redacted], contacted the company and stated that she received a phone call stating that she did not make the payment of $150.65 but she stated that the money was taken out of her bank account. The customer was advised to send in a copy of their bank statement for the company to review.
On 8/5/2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted the Company stating that she made the payment of $150.65 through her bank electronically. However, when the customer made the payment they used the old account number under her ex-husbands name. The customer would have had to update their bank with the new account number. The payment resulted in a credit balance of $150.65 to the customer's ex-husband account which was transferred to his active account. Ms. [redacted] was advised that she would need to take this up with her ex-husband.
Unfortunately, Ms. [redacted] would need to address this with her ex-husband as it was the customer's responsibility to update their account information with their bank. This was not a West Penn Power payment processing error.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2015/08/11) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I will take this up with my ex-husband as I now have a response from the company stating that his account was in fact credited from the payment I made.
However, I would like to note my concerns with the way this was handled by west penn power...
#1) If the money was sent to a closed account on a residence, why was it automatically transferred without question to any other residence just because the former account owner happened to have service at another location. It seems if any payment is made to a closed account that is paid in full it should be returned, and not automatically transferred to another location - regardless of who's name is on the account and if they have other open accounts for another residences.
#2) When I simply asked for a letter stating what had happened so I could address this with my ex-husband and have proof that this did indeed happen, I was told I was going to have to get a subpeona for that letter. If the company truly felt it did nothing wrong in applying that credit towards another residence, why would they require a subpeona in order to provide documentation of what happened?
#3) I was treated like a criminal and it on the phone because the company did not want to admit any fault in this whatsoever or provide me with any help in getting that money credited to the write payee. There was total disregard for the fact that I was now out $150.65 and to bring my account up-to-date would have to pay another $150.65. I was told because I was honest with them and told them I was going through a divorce is why they could not help me. So, what they are essentially saying is next time lie and then we would have moved it no questions asked... that doesn't sit well with me and doesn't show them as a company with integrity.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/13) */
Good morning, I believe that this complaint should be forwarded to one of the FirstEnergy Corp utilities.
FirstEnergy Solutions, a generation supplier, does not have record of Ms. [redacted]'s account, nor does it have the ability to disconnect...

service.
Thank you.
Becki P[redacted]
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 14, 2015/11/17) */
over charged and money taken without my permmission complaint #[redacted] explained to Revdex.com in Akron this is getting very old and upsetting I would like the name of employee who was at my home as I want to press criminal charges against him at no time did I give him permission to take any money from my account and at no time did he make it clear to me he was going to debit my account he stole from me. I want my money back as this has already caused me to be behind on my payments and I just had an emergency repair on my furnace I need my money back no one has the right to take from my bank account especialy since the payment was made 4 days prior to them taking my money this is stealing and at no time did I allow or give my info to a stranger at my door.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 17, 2015/11/18) */
Credited deposit, and credit created from duplicate payment that has now cleared bank. I spk with customer again on 11/17 and she seemed satisfied.

A final bill issued for the account on 8/4/17 with a balance of $167.91 due 8/28/17. The balance remained unpaid and was placed with a collection agency 9/28/17. A payment of $167.91 was received 1/23/18 and was inadvertently refunded on 2/22/18 instead of being applied to the write off...

balance. [redacted] contacted the Company 3/5/18 asking why he received a refund for the check he sent for the final balance. Mr. [redacted] was transferred to a supervisor to discuss and the supervisor verified the payment was  was refunded inadvertently. The supervisor placed a request to have the refund cancelled after Mr. [redacted] stated he did not use the credit card refund. The Company was able to have the refund cancelled and apply the customer's payment back to the account to clear the outstanding balance.  The account has a zero balance.  Attached is a copy of the account statement. The Company apologizes for any inconvenience.

Customer makes online payments with her banking institution M&T Bank in Sioux Falls SD.  A payment was submitted on 07/26/16 in the amount of $189; however was mailed to MET-ED 128 N 5th, PO Box 16001, Reading, PA.  This payment is then forwarded to the actual payment processing center...

in Akron OH.  Payment was received on 08/02/16 and processed on the account 08/03/16 at 1:15pm after service had already been terminated.  Customer will need to update her banking institution M&T Bank with the correct address to submit payments.  The correct address is listed on her bill as MET-ED, PO Box 3687, Akron, OH  44309-3687.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/14) */
The customer was contacted, A Company representative went over the details of her concerns, apologized for the delay in reconnection. However, the customer had been advised Aug 2014 via email that they needed to pay a security deposit, another...

letter was mailed advising and when no response was received the service was disconnected due to consumption on the meter. When the customer paid on 10/2 and found that the service order could not be worked until 10/5 he canceled the payment, and the process timeline started again. This was considered a new application and not an emergency order therefore emergency crews were not utilized. When the revenue protection department was contacted, the service was then connected and the paperwork was completed. Again I apologized and will coach any employee that may not of communicated accurately. Mrs. was accepting and the call ended politely. The customer was advised of her right to submit a claim for review but declined the information at this time.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/10/15) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Even so I went over the whole situation with the company's Rep, I insist, we didn't get any Email in regards to the discrepancy with the application and furthermore not even the mailed letter they stayed it was mailed to our addres on the month of August 2015 since we only moved in as October 2nd if they would of used certify mail service as everyone in business use in order to make sure the costumers is contacted they would of find out then that we were not living at this address yet; so still not clear the reason why #1. they didn't attempt to contact us via phone since all my info was on the initial online request, #2. Why the power wasn't disconnected at the time of the previous owner left the home vacant, and lastly why did they waited a whole year to take action instead of sending another letter may be certified this time to make sure we were aware of the situation; but I guess it doesn't matters now since the JCP rep started the conversation by making clear that the Revdex.com DOESN'T have any jurisdiction over the utility companies; with that said We just going to continue with our lives knowing that there is companies out there that they can operate how ever they like with out any kind of regulation, and as she said Revdex.com is just having a courtesy with me as a consumer but there is nothing else to do; So Thank you for your time.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/03/14) */
Customer was previously enrolled in Ohio's PIPP program, with a monthly obligation of $39.00. Customer was removed effective 1/4/16 for failure to reverify for the program. Customer is now responsible for actual consumption charges each month....

Customer would need to reverify with local Ohio Department of Social Services to re-enroll, if income eligible. Customer will be responsible for all current charges billed until re-enrollment is received.

Company investigated and spoke to customer in March 2016by
phone and by email.  Company also responded to a complaint filed with the
Ohio Public Utilities Commission in May and August 2016.  The debt is from customer’s former PIPP
account from [redacted] in the...

amount of $1413.05. 
Dates of service 6/23/2000- 09/30/2005.  Company cannot provide copy of
bill, as the debt is too old, however company systems maintain account balances
and payments made on accounts until the balance is satisfied.  Company has
no record that customer paid the debt.  PIPP debts are collectible for 15
years.  Ohio Edison has provided the Ohio
Public Utilities Commission of screen prints from our billing system that show
the total account balance, the service address, dates of service and PIPP
enrollment information.   Ms. [redacted] is
responsible for the debt.

12/29/2016 Customer called to see why his
payment did not auto deduct on 12/22/2016 like it was supposed to.  Customer was advised the late payment charge would
be reversed and an order would be sent to have this looked into. Account is
noted that customer would like a call back or a...

written advising of issue and
what will happen with balance due. Customer was satisfied.
01/04/2017 the department who handles the
auto payments replied to the order advising that a transfer posted to the
account on 12/22/2016, the same day the payment was to come out, causing a
differentiation in the amount invoiced and actual allowed amount to be
deducted.  This caused the auto payment
to not proceed.
01/05/2017 a call me letter was issued to the
customer as we were not able to reach him over the phone. A written utility
report was also issued to the customer advising of what the issue was. A hold
was placed on the account until 01/25/2017 to allow time for the customer to receive
the company position and dispute if needed.
01/10/2017 the customer called about the
letters he received.  He was advised that
the amount will be pulled form his bank on 01/19/2017. Customer was satisfied.
01/23/2017 Customer called about his payment
not being pulled.  He was advised he
should make his payment another way and then next month it will pull out like
it normally would or he can let it all go and it will all come out next
month.  Customer made a payment over the
phone. Customer was satisfied.
02/16/2017 Customer called and requested to
be removed from budget billing.  A new
bill was sent to the customer.  They also
requested to be removed from paperless billing. Customer was satisfied.
02/22/2017 Customer called about waiving the
late payment charge.  This was waived.  Customer was satisfied.
02/24/2017 Customer called back about having
the late payment charges reversed.  He
was advised they are reversed.
03/02/2017 customer called after hours and
was advised to call back.  Customer was
satisfied.
03/03/2017 Customer called to say that he was
told on 02/22/2017 that the late payment fees would be waived. Customer was
advised fees are not waived in the credit department.  Customer was satisfied.  
03/06/2017 customer sent an email to the
company in regard to the late payment fees. He mentioned he has called several
times to have this corrected and to have the late payment fees reversed. He has
made the payments we requested of him and still the fee is there.  Customer requested that all fees be waived
and a credit of $50 be credited to his account for his time and stress. The
company replied back advising that they see they have spoken with customer
service and this issue has been resolved. 
They were also provided direction on how to enroll in automatic
payments.
Later that day, the customer called and
verified the amount due and due date. 
Customer was satisfied.  The company position is that all late payment charges have been waived. The payment did not pull originally due to the account balance being different than what the customer was told on their monthly invoice.  Then each time the customer called in about it a lock was placed on the account to prevent any termination notices from being issued.  However, this also prevented payments from being deducted as well.  The account has been paid current and the next bill is due 03/24/2017.  The customer is no longer on autopay and therefore needs to pay the bills in another way. The customer has also filed a complaint with the PaPUC.

The coding which prevented a check payment on the account has been
removed.  Ohio Edison attempted to contact the customer 9/9/16 at the phone number provided, but was unsuccessful in reaching the customer.  The customer can contact Ohio Edison to process a...

check payment.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/29) */
Customer contacted, and arrangement negotiated, billing and usage explained, customer is satisfied.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/04/19) */
Regarding this planned outage, FirstEnergy followed our practice to notify customers two business days prior to the outage date using our reverse IVR process. Mr. [redacted]'s address in Parma was not one of the affected addresses, however, the IVR...

did not state a location for the planned outage - if it had, Mr. [redacted] would have heard that the outage was planned for several streets in the city of Cleveland and not for his home location. When Mr. [redacted] spoke with FE representatives, those representatives did not realize that Mr. [redacted]'s Parma address would not be affected by the outage and so this was not communicated to him.
FirstEnergy has taken the following action related to this situation: We have requested that specific street names be stated when reverse IVRs are issued
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/04/20) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The address was the correct address and I called them staying Sunday (not a business day) is not suffienct notice, their entire response is not correct. The lease to [redacted], [redacted] is in my name and is my voting address and primary residence. (Not sure how they got Parma). The factual errors and insuffienct solution in this response makes me more dissatified.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2016/05/02) */
The only location the company has an account in the name of Matthew [redacted] is at 6221 Jamestown Dr Parma, OH 44134.

7/13/16 - Customer called to dispute the $4.50 credit card fee. A resolution specialist explained it is a fee that the vendor charges of which could not be changed. The 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 card. The resolution specialist advised the customer the fee was always in effect. The customer wanted the phone number for corporate. The 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 disconnected. The resolution specialist attempted to call customer back but there was no answer. A dispute right letter was issued. Customer called back 7/13/16 and spoke with a supervisor in regards to the $4.50 credit card fee. The supervisor explained it was a vendor fee and offered other payment options. The customer stated he could not do the other options and wanted to speak with someone higher. The supervisor advised she would have her manager call him back. He was not satisfied, but declined rights. Still on 7/13/16, A manager called the customer in regards to the $4.50 credit card fee. Customer felt we were charging too much for him to pay by credit card. Customer refused the other payment options offered. PUC information was provided and customer stated he already contacted them. Customer stated he wanted to speak with someone in Corporate. 7/14/16, Case 3458697 received. 7/14/16, A corporate representative spoke with the customer in regards to the $4.50 credit card fee. She advised the $4.50 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 $4.50 fee when payment by credit card. The 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.

The customer has been afforded an arrangement on the security deposit, which is applicable under the below regulations set by the NJ Board of Public Utilities.  
Deposit regulations:
 
Company's request for deposit is in
compliance
with NJAC 14:3-3.4 Deposits for service...

(d)
and company tariff section 3.09.
(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 15 days after
the due date printed on the bill. The deposit required shall be in an amount
sufficient to secure the payment of future bills.
 
3.09 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.

I am rejecting this response because:
Attn [redacted]Revdex.com Case: [redacted]West Penn Power.Dispute: $168.30Dispute: $232.74Customer [redacted] disputes statements made by west penn power to Revdex.com. On Jan 4th ,2017 and other dates , Mr.[redacted] has contacted West Penn Power numerous times to discuss all billing issues- $168.30 and $232.74, incorrect Estimated meter readings, overpayments and incorrect billing, Li Heap payment $66.00 missing as of 10-09-2015. No actual meter readings. Warm Program - Bill Busters Inc Stated Mr.[redacted] bill would only be $98.61 a month for 1yr contract with West Penn Power as of 10-17-16 and that was a lie from them and it was never honored by west penn power and after the electric work was done by warm program-Freds Electric & Bill Busters Inc  in [redacted] house on thermstats andvNew fridge the electric  bill increased and not decreased .On Jan 4th,2017 A appeal has made by Mr.[redacted] to PUC on closed case with Investagator [redacted] at [redacted]- Case: BCS-[redacted] and dispute of current bill $ 232.74 & $168.30 to be presented to a Judge for a Court Hearing. Also Mr.[redacted] at Li Heap office at [redacted] , Confrimed with Mr.[redacted] that $66.00 Li Heap payment is missing from [redacted] west Penn power account as of 10-09-2015 as the money was not owed and was stolen from Columbia gas and not returned to Li Heap to process $66.00 payment to west penn power. So investigation will take place by Mr.[redacted] asap when [redacted] gets the emails and info and evidence to Mr.[redacted]. Also PUC will be investgating the case too against Columbia Gas on missing $66.00 Li Heap payment that Belongs to West Penn Power on 10-09-2015. As $194.00 was sent by mistake to columbia gas and only $128 was returned to be given to west penn power. Also Mr.[redacted] and Caseworker [redacted] at westmoreland casemangement and supports inc at [redacted] or [redacted]:ext.[redacted]  spoke to [redacted] at the dollar energy fund at [redacted] with mr.[redacted] before Jan 4th.2017 , they lied to Mr.[redacted] & Caseworker [redacted] falsely stating that A credit payment of $80 would be applied to Mr.[redacted] west Penn power account before Jan 17th,2017 on the $168.30 bill and stated Mr.[redacted] only needs to pay $86.00 on the 3rd of Jan.2017. Mr. [redacted] stated paperwork would be mailed to westpenn power before 17th of January 2017. Mr.[redacted] found out today that all of this was not true and it has put [redacted] in a termination situtation with his electric and possibly losing his place on pcap program... if a termination is filed against mr. [redacted] on his Electric account . mr. [redacted] has indicated that Li Heap will pay up to $500 from the welfare office on  [redacted]'s account after February 1st,2017.Mr. [redacted] did make $86.00 western union payment on Jan 4th 2017 on his accountCc: Attorney [redacted]
[redacted]P.s evidence inattachments in next email will be sent to you [redacted].

The customer was contacted, I explained the billing and rates, she accepted the explanation and was satisfied.   The complaint was with ref to electric supplier rates charged not JCP&L rates.

The customer filed a PUC complaint on 06/26/2017 and was placed on a PUC payment agreement for budget + supplier dollars + $26.00. The PUC is the governing body over the Company and this is the best plan for the Customer. Customer's budget amount is based on a 12 month average bill that is reviewed...

every 3 months, and is adjusted as needed. An adjustment in the customer's monthly amount could be the result of a change in usage, in their actual cost of service or extreme weather conditions. Once a year, the customer will receive an anniversary bill. This bill will be for the difference between what the customer has paid during the previous 11 months and the actual cost of the energy the customer sued for that period. The customer has chosen to have an alternate supplier and therefore their charges are not included in our budget. Their charges are in addition to our budget amount. Those charges will vary month to month based on the rate the supplier is providing and what the usage is.
 In regard to the pole in the back yard:Per an External Affairs Manager:
Line supervisor went to the customer’s residence today to check out the pole. He did encounter the customer while he was there.The pole in question is a customer-owned pole. Our triplex runs to this pole from another pole. From our triplex, the customer’s entrance cable goes down the pole to the meter box. From there, the service goes underground to the customer’s trailer. The customer-owned pole is tied to a tree. Line Supervisor did explain to the customer that the pole was owned by her, not Penelec. She appeared to accept that fact.
After learning that pole was hers, the customer then complained that another pole has been struck by lightning several times. Line Supervisor inspected that pole and found no evidence that it had been struck by lightning. Line Supervisor states the pole does lean a little, but that it is not an issue.
The pole with the transformer that serves this customer was replaced on or about 9/4/15. It broke during a storm.  In regard to billing, the customer does not use only $60 a month.  The customers average bill is $143.  That is based on the prior 12 months of usage consumed at the premise. There was not an $800 payment made in March, there was a payment of $277 made in March and that is the only payment for 2017 (with the exception of an agency grant in May).Customer was removed from PCAP in 2015 which caused a prior balance to become due. This balance is part of the PCAP deferred arrears.  When trying to re-enroll in PCAP, the account balance needs to be paid down to whatever the deferred arrears amount is prior to being eligible for re-enrollment.