FirstEnergy Corp.

The company has provided a final $5.99 credit. The company has forwarded her concern to Home Service Plan

The security deposit of $232.00 was billed to the account due to the customer's payment/credit history in accordance with Mon Power's tariff. The deposit was paid in full with the 11/28/17 payment of $485.00. The Company has issued 4 termination notices in the last 12 months on 1/26/17, 2/23/17,...

6/22/17 and 7/20/17. On 7/18/17 a bill issued for a total of $585.62 which included a past due of $351.14 and a current bill amount of $234.48 due 8/7/17. This bill included a bill message advising a security deposit would be required if bills continued to be paid late. 8/17/17 a bill issued for $235.00 budget amount due 9/6/17. 9/14/17 a bill issued for $237.00 budget amount due 10/4/17. No payment received. 10/18/17 a bill issued for $480.74 which included $237.00 past due + 243.74 budget + late fee due 11/7/17. Payment of $480.74 received 11/2/17. 11/16/17 A bill issued for $485.00 which included $253.00 budget + 232.00 security deposit due 12/6/17. A payment of $485.00 was received 11/28/17. The account is current with no payment due at this time.  The next bill issues 12/19/17.

Company records show service to [redacted] began in the name of [redacted] effective 11/27/17. A deposit of $136.00 was assessed as a new customer. The company has no record of requiring Mr. [redacted] to pay a prior tenants billing. The Company did require change of household...

verification prior to approving Mr. [redacted] for new service.

I am rejecting this response because:And I stand by my original response as well. I will be pursuing legal action for your lies and underhandedness. When you put my health, and very life on the line because you don't want to have proper business ethics, then it's time for you to learn a lesson.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/16) */
The following information has been provided by Honeywell (outside vendor) regarding Mr. [redacted]'s complaint.
Per Honeywell:
Please see response below for [redacted] complaint:
Timeline:
June 18 - Rebate Received, missing serial...

number
July 21 - Serial number received, record picked for QA inspection
Aug 27 - QA Inspection performed (Never passed in system, so record time out, decline letter sent 9/25)
Sept 30 - customer calls call center, escalation is created and resolved by expediting check
Oct 7 - Check issued, Cal notified customer - has not been cashed
Reason for Escalation:
The QA inspection was completed but the transfer of a 'Pass' result failed so the record timed out and was declined. The customer received a decline letter and not his rebate check. The customer is unhappy with the customer service provided and states he was not contacted by the program throughout his experience.
Plan going forward:
We were aware of a few cases of this that occurred during the same time period (September) and they were resolved by expediting the rebate check to the customer.
Follow up action plan:
I left a voicemail with the customer 11/9/2015 to apologize and verify if he has received the check. If he has not received it we will reissue and expedite its delivery. The customer was notified of missing information and had communications with our field rep, Cal T[redacted], as well as the call center, throughout the process.
Customer cashed check on 11/9

As information:The service at [redacted] is in the name of [redacted] and [redacted].  This account has not been enrolled in the PIPP program.  There have been no contacts on the account to advise that someone else should be handling the account or a power of...

attorney.  No phone calls have been received in the last three months from the phone number provided.   Enrollment in the PIPP plus program is voluntary.  Any account can be removed from the program if requested.   Company requests the customer contact the company concerning the account. Thank you.

I am rejecting this response because: I never received the 2 "phone messages" prior to termination of power. At NO point did my husband use ANY racial slurs. On 11/1/2016, when the supervisor called, I didn't answer because I was on hold with another Met-Ed employee. I tried to return the message left and was put back into the que. My biggest issue is that they admit that they give customers new account numbers every time that service is transferred to another residence. That is ludicrous. If my balance followed me to my new address, then why in the world would I think that my account number changed? If this is their practice, then they need to make customers aware.  The fact that they were able to see that a payment was made via their website site in the amount agreed upon, they should have been more than willing to help me. Instead, they told me it was my fault, refused to help me at all unless I paid $557.50. I made a phone call and agreed to a payment arrangement and I followed through with my end of the deal. They acted as though I completely neglected my responsibility and treated me like crap.  Where are their customer service values? I made numerous phone calls on 11/1/2016 and spoke to numerous members of Met-Ed , including several supervisors. I feel that they should be held responsible for their response to this situation.  I missed work because of this incident.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/04/11) */
The customer was enrolled with the alternate supplier from Verde Energy USA. The customer was on rate ready billing with the supplier. The Distribution Company sends one bill to the customer, which includes both Distribution Company and...

Generation Supplier charges. The generation supplier provides advance rate information to the utility. The utility will perform the calculations for both parties' charges. Penelec purchases receivables from the alternate supplier, therefore the charges are owed the Penelec not Verde Energy.
The customer is currently on a low income program called PCAP and receives a credit toward the bill each month then the customer is responsible for the remaining balance each month. At this time the monthly PCAP credit received is $55.85. Along with the monthly credit the customer can receive a forgiveness amount of $98.11 each time they pay the amount due on each billing. The forgiveness amount would pay off the balance that was deferred when enrolled into the PCAP program.

This customer has filed both an informal and formal PUC complaint regarding the same issue. The Company is currently working with the Public Utility Commission to resolve this matter.

The Company was not able to read the customer's meter for several months in a row due to mulitple dogs in the area, therefore several billings were estimated.  On 12-1-16, a meter technician installed a remote read meter that will allow the serviceman to read the meter safely from a...

near by location without exiting the vehicle.  By error, the customer's meter was billed to a nearby account.  Corrections have been processed.This error, along with several previous estimates, caused a high balance due on the account.  Customer will be receiving a letter from the Company regarding the rebilling.  Also, the Company would offer the customer an installment plan to pay the balance over the next several months if needed. Any inconvenience to the customer is regretted by the Company.

The customer reported an outage to the Company on 3/5/18.   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 1,600 JCP&L linemen, damage assessors, hazard responders, forestry personnel,...

dispatchers and contractors are working to restore customer outages. In addition, more than 430 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 trucks. Heavy, wet snow caused additional outages and also prevented access to some damage locations. JCP&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.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/04/05) */
[redacted] was enrolled with FirstEnergy Solutions, an Alternate Supplier, from 05/16/14 to 01/14/16.
On 01/15/16, customer began service with AEP Energy Inc., an Alternate Supplier.
Ohio Edison cannot speak on behalf of the...

Alternate Supplier, FirstEnergy Solutions, or regarding their charges/fees. The customer would need to dispute this with FirstEnergy Solutions.

The Customer established service at [redacted] on 4/7/17.   The customer was issued a bill on 3/7/18 for service from 2/6/18 to 3/5/18 based on an actual reading for an amount of $255.50.  We show that the prior month(s) bill was based on an...

estimate and the current bill is based on an actual meter reading.  Based on the amount of the current bill, we can conclude that the prior month(s) bill was more than likely underestimated and the usage has caught up on this bill. Estimates for residential customers are calculated using the prior year or the prior month, plus a weather correcting factor.  This location had minimal usage the prior year due to the service being in the landlord's name.   To avoid estimated bills the customer has the option of contacting the company and providing a meter reading for scheduled estimated months.  This will prevent any under or over estimated bills.   The customer is enrolled with an alternate supplier, Clearview Electric, as of 10/20/17.  An alternate supplier is the company that generates and/or markets electricity.  The distribution company is the company that distributes electricity from the transmission lines to the customer.  The customer's bill includes both charges for the alternate supplier and distribution portion of their bills.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/28) */
The original customer complaint was filed on 5/9/15 by [redacted]'s and it regarded how his red maple tree was removed. On 5/11/15, our Forester, went to Mr. [redacted]s residence to view the work that had been performed by our contracted tree company,...

[redacted]. Our Forester concluded that the work was within the OE specs for tree removal and left a blue card on the house with his name and phone number on it.
On Monday, May 18th, the Forester received a phone call from Mr. [redacted]s not regarding the red maple tree from his initial complaint, it was now regarding the three cracked sections in his sidewalk that he stated the contractor, [redacted], damaged when they removed the tree. The Forester proceeded to advise Mr. [redacted]s that if there was damage done to his property, this would be the sole responsibility of the contractor to resolve this issue for him. Mike then offered to give him the name and number of the General Foreman for the tree company to help him resolve it. Mr. [redacted]s stated he was already speaking to them before he had even called us on his original complaint to us.
The issue of this would be the responsibility of the contracted company, [redacted] to work with Mr. [redacted]s in resolving the damage complaint.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/08/09) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
My original contact on 5/9 was in regards to the cracked sidewalk. It wasnt in regards to the work being done. The tree that was cut done was not a red maple but an oak tree they got that wrong.
My issue with the Ohio Edison is that they tell me I have to deal with the contractor that they hired. I did not choose the tree service to cut it down. Ohio edison choose them and now I have to deal with a contractor they hired to get to get my sidewalk fixed. I did not pay them to have it done so where is it my responsibility to deal with someone I did not hire.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/08/13) */
Mr. [redacted]s granted [redacted] permission to remove the tree, as documented in the attached file. Ohio Edison has an indemnification clause in the purchase order with [redacted]. [redacted] Supervisor was in contact with Mr. [redacted]s on 8/11/15 .

Company records show [redacted], current customer of record (COR) was issued a disconnect notice for non-payment. The COR requested a cancellation of service effective 9/6/17. The same day [redacted] applied for service in her husbands name, [redacted]. Due to the large account...

balance and disconnect activity pending on the account, she was advised the company would require verification of change of household. Accurint also placed the current COR as still a member of the household.  She was advised to provide a notarized lease from the landlord. [redacted] later called back and said she didn't have a lease or deed to the property because it belonged to her father-in-law who passed away in March. She was advised without verification of change in household, the company would not grant service to another party. current COR called the same day and cancelled her request for cancellation of service.  current COR then called 9/8/17 and set up a payment plan on the account and made a payment of $200.00. Company records show the household has not changed, therefore service was denied in the name of [redacted].

Company was locate the property.  The service at the location has an outstanding unpaid balance of over $1,000.00, therefore when [redacted] contacted the Company to apply for service, proof of ownership was requested.  Mr. [redacted] stated he purchased the property from [redacted] and Company requested legal documentation; copy of legal deed, bill of sale or title.  Also Mr. [redacted] has an outstanding past due balance that would need paid before service is granted as well.  This information was provided to him by Company on several occasions.  After all past due balances are paid in full and legal proof of ownership is received/reviewed, Company will grant service.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/23) */
Customer was assessed deposit based on late payment history, during the past 12 months, customer has been assessed (9) late payment charges. In addition, the total account balance was not paid in full before the next billing cycle; bills issued...

in August, September and October 2015 each had a carry-over balance from the prior month. A deposit warning notification was included on customers 10/14/15 billing.
The account is not eligible for a waiver on the deposit, however company will agree to bill the deposit in (3) installments of $52.00 each.

I am rejecting this response because: there was never a hold because there was not a disconnect the hold is only for a disconnect which at the time I did not have one and that appointment was for reverifed my pip not for the winter crisis which is why I had an appointment for 12/13/2016 at 1:15pm and the customer service agent confirmed my appointment on 11/13/2016 and said that everything was ok and that my services would not be interrupted because of the appointment for 12/13/2016 heap confirmed this as well they have denied my appointment that they were well known of

Potomac Edison issued a billing statement to the
customer on January 18, 2018 in the amount of $395.35 which included $176.20
past due plus $219.15 current charges due February 7, 2018.  Payments are due upon presentation; any bill
or part of a bill not paid by the final date for payment is...

subject to receive
a disconnect notice.  The customer was issued a termination notice on February 16, 2016 in the amount of $199.98 for disconnection scheduled on or after March 5, 2018.   ncluded is a statement of account for the past 24 months.  It shows billing and customer payments.  The customer has not posted monthly payments to the account to cover the full amount due resulting in accumulated arrears and collection activity on the account.

The Company did not receive prior notification of the customer's request to stop service.  Customer called on 2/27/18 and spoke to a Supervisor who reviewed our records and could not locate a call requesting service end.  Service was ended 2/28/18.  Bill is accurate and payable.