Potomac Electric Power

Pepco’s Green Power Team received the signed Certificate of Completion and inspection sticker for the customer’s solar equipment on July 2, 2014. On July 7, 2014, a request was issued to have the Net Energy Meter (NEM) installed. On July 7, 2014, we acknowledged receipt of the Certificate of...

Completion documents with an email to both the contractor and the customer. A NEM meter was installed on July 11, 2014. The customer will be notified when they have been approved to operate.On July 16, 2014, **. [redacted] of Pepco’s Green Power Team spoke with the customer to address the concerns voiced in this complaint. She provided information regarding the Green Power Connection Team’s process of handling applications, confirmed receipt of his certification of completion and the installation of the Net Energy Meter. She further apologized that we did not meet his customer service expectations.We take our customer service goals very seriously and we sincerely apologize that we failed to provide the level of customer service that the customer should expect. This complaint has been forwarded to the Leadership of the Green Power Team for training and process improvement purposes.I hope this information is helpful in responding to the customer’s concerns.

September 15, 2014Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for contacting Pepco. Your billing concerns were forwarded to me for review and I appreciate the opportunity to provide the following information.Attached, for your convenience, is a billing history for service from December 7, 2012...

to January 9, 2014. All of the bills during the referenced period are based on actual meter readings. Additionally, on January 30, 2014, your meter was tested at an overall accuracy rating of 99.6%, which is within the accuracy guidelines (98% to 102%) prescribed by the Maryland Public Service Commission. As meters record electricity cumulatively, each subsequent actual meter reading serves to confirm the accuracy of the preceding billing. Based on this information, your billing is an accurate reflection of your energy usage.Although we understand your concerns over the higher than expected bills, Pepco is not in a position to determine what internal conditions or equipment contribute to your usage. Pepco is responsible for rendering a bill based on actual data retrieved from the meter serving your home and for ensuring the meter is recording electricity accurately. You are responsible for the energy used within the home as recorded by the meter. That includes monitoring your usage and determining what equipment or appliances are contributing to that usage. However, we can assist you in this effort by arranging an appointment for you to speak with one of our Energy Engineers. They can offer you additional, customized information on managing your energy usage and help you identify what factors contribute to your electric consumption. Please contact me at the telephone number listed above and I will arrange to have a Pepco Energy Engineer get in touch with you.Thank you again for the opportunity to respond. You are a valued customer and we look forward to continuing to serve you.Sincerely,
Stan P
Special Investigation Representative

May 1, 2014
This letter serves as a response to your inquiry on behalf of our mutual customer, [redacted] regarding the billing at the above referenced service address.**. [redacted] has had accounts with Pepco at the three service locations referenced below. The two former accounts were...

closed and the final bill balances were transferred to the subsequent address. The chart below references each account held, span of responsibility, final charges and the account where the final balance was transferred. Additionally, attached is a billing summary itemizing each account, which includes supplier charges and final charges.Two investigations were formerly conducted for [redacted]. The first investigation, concluded in March 2013, resulted in a $700.00 credit to the account (see page 3 on the attached billing summary). The second investigation, concluded in March 2014, regarding the transfer of the final bill for service at [redacted], found that the transfer was appropriate and the account was subject to normal collection activity.Per the customers request, the accounts at [redacted] and [redacted] were enrolled with a third-party electricity supplier. On January 5, 2011, [redacted] became the supplier at [redacted] and on June 18, 2012, [redacted] became the customers supplier at [redacted]. Both accounts were enrolled in consolidated billing. When consolidated billing is selected during enrollment, the utility purchases and pays the supplier charges each month. This means the paid debt is now owned by the utility, which becomes subject to the utilitys normal collection procedures up to and including disconnection. As a result, the supplies receivables were included with each final bill and transferred to the subsequent account, including the active account for services at [redacted].
On September 10, 2013, the electric service at [redacted] ([redacted]) was disconnected for arrears totaling $1,374,02. The company opted to accept a partial payment in the amount of $770.44 to restore the service and place the remaining balance on a twelve month installment agreement. The service was restored and a new account number ([redacted]) was assigned. However, on September 13, 2013, the $770.44 payment returned for insufficient funds, Subsequently, payments were received on September 20, 2013 ($225.73), September 24, 2013 ($509.71, which was returned), October 14, 2013 ($350.29) and November 12, 2013 ($180.00). Due to a delay in billing, the first bill that was rendered after reconnection was in December 2013. The delay in billing had no bearing on the reliability of service.
On January 28, 2014, another twelve month installment plan was established for the customers outstanding balance of $1,744.84. An initial payment in the amount of $428.80 was due by February 14, 2014, and the remaining balance ($1,286.04) was to be paid in twelve monthly installments of $107.17 each, payable with the monthly charges beginning with the bill due March 2014. The initial payment ($430.80) was received on February 19, 2014; however, the March and April 2014 installments were not paid and the payment plan was cancelled.
Currently, the total amount due is $2,439.43, which includes arrears ($2,210,86) and current charges ($228.57) that are due by May 14, 2014. In order to be considered for another installment agreement, a payment of $1,220.00 (cash or money order) must be paid on or before May 14, 2014. The customer would need to verify the payment was received on May 14, 2014 and establish new payment arrangements at that time to prevent disconnection.In closing, we have determined each account was billed correctly, including the transfer of each final billed balance to the next active account and no adjustment is necessary or warranted. Unpaid charges from former accounts, along with accrued arrearages on the active account all contribute to the overall balance presently due.
I trust this information will assist you in responding to the customers concerns, if you have any additional questions, please contact .Sincerely,

Review: Hello,

I have been trying to settle a quite complex problem with PEPCO since June 2013. We recently received a letter informing us of the measures they are taking to correct our situation. Unfortunately, I've noticed that they have misunderstood the problem we were having, and therefore the refund they are offering us is incorrect.

Our situation involves 2 major issues that I will try to describe here.

---------------------------- General Information ------------------------------------

The address involved is [redacted]. We have since moved out.

The Pepco account number linked to this address is [redacted].

Three meters are here to take into account:

- Meter A: our actual meter, the one that was used for the readings, # [redacted]

- Meter B: the meter that we got crossed billed with following construction work in our building on May 2013, and serves the 155 Westway, T3. #[redacted]

- Meter C: meter appearing on ours bills, responsible for a 10 multiplier, #[redacted] (apparently corresponding to the address [redacted])

---------------------------- Initial Problem Description ------------------------------------

The situation is as follows:

The readings on our bills from May 2012 until May 2013 were done on meter A and reflected our actual use (for example, we didn't use heat at all during the winter except for one month, a fact that was reflected in the raw numbers on our bills). At the end of May 2013, some construction work was done in our building that resulted in our meter being switched with [redacted]. At that point, meter B was actually measuring our use (while the reading on meter A was reflecting [redacted]’s).

On top of that, for all that time period, we had a 10 multiplier that was applied because the meter number appearing on the bill (meter C) was not the right one. However, the readings used were the one from meter A, and as previously stated were correct (apart from the 10 multiplier). The multiplier comes from the fact that meter C was an analog meter (and therefore had its first number indicate the tens), while meter A is digital (and therefore has its first number indicate the units).

As a consequence, I believe that our situation should be corrected as follow:

For the time period running from May 2012 to May 2013, the readings are good, and the multiplier should be removed (the total use should be 1/10 of the usage indicated in the original bills).

For the time period running from June 2013 to August 2013, the readings are incorrect (because they correspond to the wrong apartment) and the multiplier should also be removed.

I have available an Excel sheet detailing those numbers, and reflecting (according to the detailed billing information available on each bill) the total refund that we should receive. I also have weekly pictures of the meters taken starting June 2013. I also have in my possession the information for the technician that came and figured out what that the problems were.

------------------------------- Failure to Correct Billing Errors -----------------------------

[redacted] from the Billing Services and Investigations Department has been in charge of our claim, and corrected it by charging us for the time period running from May 2012 to May 2013 the use recorded by the actual meter C, for the address 1828 D St NE #1, Washington DC, without correcting the situation for the time period running from June 2013 to August 2013.

The mistake here is that **. [redacted] failed to understand that the readings were correct, but the simple original mistake was the wrong meter number on the bills leading to a multiplier. **. [redacted] during our phone conversations failed to understand that the readings were correct, and that the meters’ readings for the time period running from May 2012 to May 2013 were not actually crossed (just their reference on the bills).

Moreover, she failed to take into account the cross-billing between meters A and B for the time period running from June 2013 to August 2013. Therefore, for this time period, we have been paying for our neighbor’s electrical use.

As a result, Pepco offered us a refund of $1579.17 for the time period from May 2012 to May 2013, and did not correct the second part of the problem (meter crossing after construction work). The amount of the incorrect bills from June 2013 to August 2013 were subtracted from this refund.

------------------------------ Conclusion ----------------------------------

Consequently, PEPCO currently owes us –according to my calculations- a final total $1622.30, minus the billing corresponding to the period from June 11, 2013 to July 23, 2013 for the meter #[redacted].

I was unable to get the actual use from June 11, 2013 to July 23, 2013 since we noticed a problem on June 11 but only figured out what was happening more than a month later. If those numbers are not available, I am willing to accept estimates based on our use from the previous year for the months of June and July.

I am available for any questions you have by phone (###-###-####) or by email ([redacted]), and would like to let you know that your help and work on this matter is really appreciated.

Regards,

[redacted]Desired Settlement: I would like PEPCO to give us a refund for the final amount of $1622.30, minus the billing corresponding to the period from June 11, 2013 to July 23, 2013 for the meter #[redacted].

Business

Response:

September 25, 2013

**. [redacted] 1411 K St NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005

Re: **. [redacted]

[redacted] Account #[redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

This letter serves to respond to the reverse metering situation for the above referenced customer. I have reviewed the manner in which the account was billed and would like to offer the following explanation.

On July 17, 2013, our technician identified a reverse metering condition at the customer’s residence, and they have been erroneously billed for electric service recorded on meter #[redacted], which serves [redacted], instead of meter #[redacted], which serves his residence at [redacted]. A reverse meter condition can result from various conditions including, but not limited to, structural changes, apartment number changes, meter switching, meter cabinets marked incorrectly, or incorrect information on our billing records. In this instance, electricians were doing work at the above referenced address, and replaced the meters in the incorrect meter sockets. Consequently, after verification of the correct meter numbers for each account, our billing records are corrected, and adjustments are made to each account.

It is our policy to correct this error by computing the total corrected charges for both affected accounts. Typically, one customer has been over-billed while the other has been under-billed. **. [redacted]’s account was over-billed; therefore, the account was originally credited for $1,579.17, which reflects the difference between the original billing ($2,140.16) and the corrected billing ($560.99). However, after a review of the original corrected billing, it was determined that this comparison included Pepco charges for distribution and supplier charges for generation.

Therefore, the corrected billing was recalculated using Pepco charges for generation and distribution. As a result an additional credit of $166.16 was applied to the account. For your review, enclosed is a billing summary reflecting the original and corrected bills from April 30, 2012 to June 11, 2013. The reverse metering condition was corrected and all bills for service after June 11, 2013 reflect usage from the corrected meters.

The account was final billed on August 27, 2013, in the amount of $315.53. After applying the credit balance of $1,579.17, the account reflected a credit balance of $1,263.64. However, after applying the additional credit of $166.16, the account now reflects a final bill credit balance of $1,429.80.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond. If you have any questions regarding this information, you may contact me at the telephone number listed above.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

Dear [redacted],

I am rejecting this response because, while really helpful, the response offered by **. [redacted] does not address the whole situation, and still misses the fact that two separate reverse metering conditions occurred. **. [redacted], as well as the person previously in charge of our case, only address the latest one. Moreover, the issuance of our final bill raised more questions, directly related to this problem. Pepco still owes us a total of $1,526.34. This is the raw amount that as been over-collected, and does not account for possible interests that could be claimed (and that we are not even requesting). The correction offered by **. [redacted] is still off by $96.54.

I have attached to this email a detailed response to **. [redacted]' letter explaining (hopefully thoroughly) what are the issues that remain to be fixed, and how -I believe- it should be addressed based on the information that currently are at my disposition.

Finally, I would to thank both you and **. [redacted] for being so helpful in trying finally fix this issue. I stay available either via email or phone if you need to contact me.

Regards,

Business

Response:

October 1, 2013

**. [redacted]

1411 K St NW, Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20005

Re: **. [redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

This letter serves to respond to the ongoing concerns regarding the reverse meter corrections for the above referenced customer. 1 regret that our previous response did not satisfactorily resolve **. [redacted]’s concerns. Unfortunately, the final bill **. [redacted] received earlier contained incorrect bill print information.

As previously stated, the account was final billed on August 27, 2013, in the amount of $315.53. After applying the credit balance of $1,579.17, the account reflected a credit balance of $1,263.64. However, after applying the additional credit of $166.16, the account reflected a final bill balance of $1,429.80

The additional credit adjustment of $166.16 is reflected on the corrected final bill, a copy of which is enclosed with this letter. After applying the original credit balance of $ 1,579.17 to the past due amount of $165.84, the account reflected a credit balance of $1,413.33. The additional credit of $166.16 was applied after the original final bill was rendered, resulting in a credit balance of $1,579.49. Subsequently, the final bill, in the amount of $149.69 was applied, leaving a credit balance of $1,429.80. Credit balances do not accrue interest on Pepco accounts.

The credit balance of $1,429.80 will be mailed back to the customer. He should be receiving the refund check shortly. Please express our sincere apologies to the customer for the bill print errors that appeared on his original final bill.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

Review: I received a bill dated 12/05/2013 from PEPCO and noted that the charges were inaccurate based on previous usage data. Prior to receiving this ebill, I had called PEPCO's customer service to alert them to the fact that I hadn't received a bill from them since I made my last payment for the September billing cycle. They updated my ebill acoount and sent me a bill for $1,643.12 that showed my energy usage for the 3-month cycle was 11,246KWh. I called the customer service line on the 28th of December when I noted this discrepancy. I informed her that my average monthly bill have flunctuated between $140 - $180 with energy usage in KWh averaging about 1000-1400KKWh monthly, and that for a 3 month billing cycle, the amount was excessive and surely there was something amiss. She sent my case to their investigation office on the same day.

It's been over 4 weeks since the case was opened and I have contacted the investigator assigned to the case. She has been curteous but till date no one has been able to tell me how they came up with the high energy reading since my January bill was consistent with what the trend had been prior to the outrageous bill I received in December. I am on a budget billing plan, and I am worried that when my account gets reconciled PEPCO will make me come up with the disputed portion on my account. Aside from this discrepancy my account is in good tsanding and I have never failed to pay my account on time.Desired Settlement: I'd like my bill adjusted and an explanation for the discrepancy so it doesn't happen again. I'd also like a breakdown of my energy consumption.

Business

Response:

February 13, 2014

Dear **. [redacted]:

Due to a clerical error, a meter reading of 1050 was inadvertently recorded as 10500 on the November 7, 2013 bill statement. As a result, **. [redacted] was billed for $1,643.12. Our Billing Department corrected the error on February 4, 2014. The bill for $1,643.12 was subsequently cancelled and recalculated in the amount of $296.59. We apologize for this error and for any inconvenience this may have caused the customer.

A bill issued on February 12, 2014 reflects a balance due of $322.53 by March 5, 2014. Although the customer is enrolled in our Budget Bill Plan at $203.00 a month, the account is now in the plan settlement month. The balance includes charges for the difference between the cost of actual usage and the budget billing payments made during the plan year. Next month, the customer’s budget billing payment will be reset based on the previous 12 months usage.

Sincerely,

Review: I've been dealing with PEPCO for 3 1/2 years now and have always had problems. I am currently paying back a balance of almost $2000 for a problem that neither them or my apartment complex were able to figure out, they have pointed finger at each other and in the end im stuck paying that bill. I had to make a payment arrangement in January 2013 so that my electricity was paid, I was paying $150 in addition for my monthly charges. I pay my bills every month through theyre websity by the due date they give. In july, I was taken off the payment arrangement because PEPCO claims I paid late, which I have the statements online which show the dates the bills were paid but they offered to put the payment plan back in place with a remaining balance of about $600 where I would pay $100 plus the monthy charges. In october they cancelled the arrangement again with no explanation as to why. I have paid the balance down to $196 as of the 14th of November, I checked my statement today and see a charge of $205 for "electrical charges" in addition to my balance of $196 and current monthly usage charges. I emailed PEPCO and they said they aren't aware of what those charges are that I need to speak to my electrical supplier. I pay my supplier through PEPCO every month, they break down the charges from the supplier and the charges from PEPCO and together thats my monthly usage charges. I contact PEPCO at least 1x a week and still don't have answers to any of my questions. Unfortunately, I have no other option for Electricity because PEPCO is the only utility company in my area.Desired Settlement: I would like an explanation for the charges, how is the supplier charging an extra $200 in addition to what I pay every month. Also an explanation why I was taken off the payment arrangements.

Business

Response:

December 3, 2013

Dear [redacted]:

This letter serves as a response to your inquiry on behalf of our mutual customer, [redacted] regarding her billing concerns. Attached are copies of the monthly bills for services from November 13, 2012 to November 13, 2013.

The supplier enrollment record indicates [redacted] Electric became the customer’s supplier, with consolidated billing, on February 13, 2013. When consolidated billing is selected during enrollment, the utility will purchase and pay in full the supplier’s receivables each month. This means the paid debt is now owned by the utility, which becomes subject to normal collection procedures including disconnection. Concerns regarding the supplier charges must be directed to the supplier. Please note, Pepco returned as the default supplier on November 13, 2013. Any outstanding supplier charges will be subject to normal collection procedures.

Within the past twelve months, the account was enrolled into two installment agreements; both were cancelled due to non-compliance. In addition to paying the monthly installment, the supplier’s current charges (paid receivables) were payable by the due date of each bill. After researching the account’s billing history, our findings indicate the account was billed accurately. This is also true as it relates to the termination of each installment agreement. Printed on the monthly bills were the terms of each respective installment agreement, along with special alerts warning of the impending cancellations. At this time, the total amount due by December 9, 2013, is $200.00. This balance represents Pepco current charges totaling $27.76, supplier arrears totaling $127.14 and supplier current charges totaling $45.10.

I trust this information will assist you in responding to the customer’s concerns. If you have any additional questions, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Review: I have been without Electricity for the 5 days now, starting 12NOV2014. I have been living in [redacted] Apartments in Greenbelt Maryland for the past 3 years( starting in 2012) , my utilities as explained by the property manager, was to be divided amongst all residents and billed monthly to each individual( electricity included). At some point in 2013 [redacted] Apartments switched this policy, and residents were then suppose to get in contact with Pepco to pay for electricity. I was never made aware of this policy change. Pepco has never contacted me, nor has my apartment manger. My entire apartment runs on electric to include my heating unit . I also have a medical condition that require me to remain in a stable environment, not a freezing cold apartment. I have called and left messages for Ms. Keisha P[redacted] ( an individual in the Revenue Department) , I have yet to speak to her, as she does not answer her phone line nor does she return calls. I find it unbelievable that electricity has been provided to my unit for so long without any payment. I have diligently and respectfully tried to resolve this matter and it does not seem to be getting addressed in an appropriate manner. I am completely appalled by the lack of customer service Pepco's customer service representatives have as well. This has been a huge inconvenience.Desired Settlement: I will be in contact with my Apartments management, as well as [redacted] legal. I feel that due to the poor communication from Pepco, [redacted] Apartments and also the lack of any account ever being made on my behalf after 2 years of service, I should not be fully held responsible for a bill that has accumulated for the past 2 years.

Business

Response:

December 5, 2014Dear [redacted]:This letter serves as a response to your inquiry on behalf of our mutual customer, [redacted], regarding establishing new service at [redacted], Greenbelt, Maryland.In the absence of a responsible party, on November 11, 2014, the electric service was disconnected at the above referenced address. [redacted] subsequently provided Pepco with a copy of his lease, which indicated he became responsible for the electric service on April 13, 2013. Therefore, an account was established in his name effective with the date specified in the lease, and his service was restored on November 17, 2014. An initial bill will generate within the next few weeks, at which time the customer may contact Pepco's Customer Care Center at ###-###-####, if he wishes to establish payment arrangements.I regret it was necessary for [redacted] to contact us more than once to resolve his concerns andappreciate the opportunity to respond.Sincerely,Stephanie R

Review: Dear Sir or Madame--

PEPCO has failed to correct an instance of account fraud. I never opened an electricity bill account with them in September 2013, as they allege. Furthermore, I have never lived at the service address to which they bill the service. Despite my numerous complaints, and a so-called internal investigation that PEPCO says it conducted, the company still says I am responsible for the $758.19 bill that has accumulated from September 2013 until March 31, 2014. The company has failed to remove the account from my name. The account also continues to accrue charges that will go to collections soon and appear on my credit report.

The dispute began in February, when I received a phone call about an overdue PEPCO electricity bill. I told the PEPCO operator that I do not have an open account with their company; [redacted] provides my services. When I inquired about the service address, the operator provided an address where I have never resided. The operator then said the company would conduct an investigation that could last 7-10 days. She said it was possible that someone could have used my social security number to open an account fraudulently in my name. I informed her that I had indeed been a victim of the massive [redacted] identity hack. She assured me that PEPCO would look into it--especially since the account was opened online and not via a live telephone call (which would have proved it were me.)

I waited the requisite time for the investigation to pass. Then, I received a letter in the mail dated March 15, which informed me that I was still liable for the charges. Nowhere in the letter did it indicate that fraud was investigated or determined. Instead, the letter accused me of opening the account and merely forgetting to cancel or transfer the services. The opening lines read, "We have completed a review of our records concerning the proper closing date for the referenced account. The effective date on the account was not changed because we did not receive prior notification of your desire to terminate this account."

I maintain that I did not open this account. Since I did not open it, I would not have known to close it. I am still uncertain as to how the identity thief stole both my social security number and my cell phone number, but major news outlets have reported that those affected by the [redacted] scam did have such personal details taken.

For this reason, I contest PEPCO's decision to place this near-$800 bill at my family's feet. I do not believe the company made a good faith effort to investigate the fraud, and now my credit report may possibly be affected. Please help me communicate with this large company that does not seem to care about individuals--especially in cases of identity theft. I can provide my 2013/2014 lease and [redacted] bills as proof of residence, if need be.

Thank you.Desired Settlement: I would like the PEPCO account that is open in my name to be closed with a balance of $0.

Business

Response:

Hi [redacted],

Please ask the customer if she filed a police report regarding ID theft; if so a copy is needed for our investigation.

Thanks,

Office: ###-###-####

Review: PEPCO offers a transfer of service online via their website. However, in using that website to transfer my service, PEPCO claimed the website request did not go through, despite receiving an email confirmation of the submission. As a result, they have charged me for bills at a residence I did not occupy during the billing period.

I was told that the official way to transfer was by phone only 3 days before moving which is not implicit on their website. I am filing a complaint to ensure PEPCO updates its web to reflect the mandatory phone call rule and to confirm on site whether a request has been submitted effectively. A consumer has no way of telling whether the request has been effectively submitted and does not have any awareness of the mandatory phone call rule.Desired Settlement: Desired outcome is for PEPCO to change its web page for transfer of service to a. confirm onsite a submission of a request and b. to make explicit that filling out the form is not the official way to transfer service but that a phone call must be made which is currently not implied on their transfer page: https://www.pepco.com/home/requests/startstop/transfer/default.aspx

Business

Response:

February 5, 2014

Dear **. [redacted],

This is in response to complaint #[redacted] regarding **. [redacted]’s billing concerns and our website, which was used to transfer service online. I have reviewed both accounts and would like to offer the following information.

I regret that it was necessary for **. [redacted] to contact us more than once tor resolve her concerns. As stated on our website, consumers may use our website to close an account and set up a new account at the same time, by completing and submitting the online form or by calling Pepco at ###-###-####. We apologize for any misinformation that may have been provided to the consumer.

**. [redacted]’s service request to establish a new account at [redacted] was processed. However, upon further review, due to an administrative issue, the service request to close the account at [redacted] was not processed, which resulted in a final bill for service beyond her date of responsibility.

Subsequently, a corrected final bill was issued for [redacted] and the credit balance of $52.64 has been transferred to the account at the new service location (see attached). During my review,

I found the start reading, which was used to render the initial billing for the new account, was incorrect. Therefore, the consumer’s original initial bill was also corrected to reflect the proper meter readings (see attached).

I trust this information will serve to satisfactorily resolve **. [redacted]’s concerns and I appreciate the opportunity to respond. If you should have any questions, please contact me at ###-###-####.

Sincerely,

Review: First, I have received a bill for $105.30 when in July I haven't even used the AC except for 2 days. In July 22nd, me and my son traveled for 3 weeks, and now they are charging me $76 when we were not even here. I called them and complain about both charges. I asked to speak with a supervisor and she asked a dumb question that maybe I let the AC on for that time I was not here, which of course is dumb, besides my AC is 2 years old. Then she transferred me to the energy wise program and they again told me that maybe the appliances were on, of course the refrigerator was on, but I don't even have a washing machine, so it's obvious they don't want to help or even give a credit for the month of August-September or both, so it's really appalling the way they charge. We usually come past 7 pm and and I am a single mother.

I sent them a letter 2 weeks ago, never received and answer. I also complained last year about the high bills.Desired Settlement: The bill for July-August is too high and the August-September is just ridiculous, they need to do and adjust them.

Business

Response:

October 1, 2013

**. [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant

Revdex.com 1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404

Re: Consumer Complaint No. [redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

This letter serves as a response to your inquiry on behalf of our mutual customer, **. [redacted], regarding her bills (copies attached) for service from July 10 to August 8, 2013, totaling $105.30 and from August 8 to September 9, 2013, totaling $76.11. Please convey our apologies to the customer if she was unable to receive a response when she contacted us previously.

All of the customer’s bills during the past 12 months were based on actual meter readings. As meters record electricity cumulatively, each subsequent actual meter reading serves to confirm the accuracy of the preceding billing.

On September 17, 2013, one of our Energy Advisors made an effort to assist **. [redacted] with identifying trends or habits that may have impacted the disputed bills. However, this assistance was merely provided as a tool, as Pepco is not in a position to definitively determine what internal conditions, usage and living habits contribute to the customer’s consumption.

The customer may be interested in using Pepco’s interactive tool; My Account, which can help her analyze her bills, better understand her energy usage and find ways to conserve energy. This free tool may be accessed by visiting our website at www.pepco.com.

In closing, my review of the account reflects no evidence that the customer has been billed incorrectly; therefore, an adjustment is not warranted. I trust this information will assist you in responding to the customer’s concerns. If you have any additional questions, please contact me.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

They said that my bills during the last 12 months were base on actual meter readings? What about when I called in 2010 and 2011 and I sent you a letter which I am attaching, Pepco told me they can't come to check the meter because the readings are done electronically? Can they come now? I have been complaining for years about high bills, as I said we come around 7 pm and nobody is here so why should I pay for a service that I barely use? Furthermore, we were out of the country and you still are charging as a full month?

Since I have had this problem before, I have marked my calendar with the days I have use the AC, August 3 days, September 1 day, so I totally reject Pepco's response, as always so appalling.

Review: I received a letter from Pepco stating that I have been overcharged in the amount of $1,462.00. The letter went on to note that my account will be credited the amount of $1,462.00. That is not what I wish to have done with my money. I was over charged and I feel it is only right that they refund my money in its entirety. This is my money that I have worked hard for, and to find out that there was a glitch in their meter readings has me feeling like I have been betrayed by a company I placed my trust in. I wasn't even given a phone call to ask me would I either like to have my money back or credit to my account. Although, it is a credit to my account, Pepco is forcing me to give the money right back to their business; money that I will never see again. I have called Mr. S. R[redacted] (###-###-####) and left a message including my name and phone number, to no avail.Desired Settlement: I would like a check in the amount that I over paid.

Business

Response:

August 25, 2014Dear [redacted]:Earlier this month, we discovered the customer had been billed for electric service recorded on an incorrect meter. After verifying the correct meter information, our billing records were corrected and we computed the total charges for both affected accounts. As a result of [redacted] being overbilled, a credit adjustment in the amount of $1,463.00 was issued on August 13, 2014.The customer is certainly entitled to a refund for the credit adjustment and I apologize that our Billing Services & Investigations Department was unresponsive to [redacted]' request.I have expedited a request to refund $1,463.00 to [redacted] and the check was mailed to the customer on Friday, August 22, 2014.I trust this information will assist you in responding to [redacted]’ concerns.Richard C[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

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

Regards,

Review: when I compare my Sept 2012 bill to my Sept 2013 bill, my usage is about the same. My overall bill has gone up about $17, or 9%, year over year when it was reported in the news in July, 2013 that the average increase would be about $2 per household. Again, my bill went up about $17 for the one month alone. The big concern here is that the energy charge increased by 48% from Sept 2012 to Sept 2013. This is price gouging and unethical. I will not stand for this. I spoke with Pepco and they said the bill is correct. I spoke with **. [redacted] of the State of Maryland Public Service Commission, and she said the state will not do anything about my bill and that I have to pay it.Desired Settlement: that my increase is in-line with the $2 per month increase reported in the news in July, 2013.

Business

Response:

November 6, 2013

**. [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant

Revdex.com 1411 K St., N.W. 10* Floor Washington, D.C. 20005-3404

Re: Account Number: [redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

This letter serves to address **. [redacted]’s concerns regarding the billing for the above referenced Pepco account. I appreciate the opportunity to provide the following explanation.

In November, 2012, Pepco filed an application with the Maryland Public Service Commission for a rate increase ($60.8 million). Pepco also requested a grid resiliency surcharge ($192 million). These requests were primarily for reliability investments in Maryland’s Pepco region. On July 12, 2013, the Maryland Public Service Commission approved a rate increase ($27.9 million) for Pepco. They also granted a grid resiliency surcharge ($24 million). Beginning August 1, 2013, the new rates were used to calculate the energy charges on our customers’ bills. A notification of the change in the distribution rate was included in the Pepco bill that was mailed to **. [redacted] on August 26, 2013.

The bill (August 22 to September 24, 2013) in dispute and the subsequent bill (September 24 to October 23, 2013) are approximately 9% higher than the comparable bills. Please understand it is Pepco’s position that these bills are accurate. Moreover, the approved increase in the energy charge was necessary. Alternatively, we are committed to helping our customers “use less energy, save more money and improve the environment.” To that end, we have implemented several programs that are designed to assist our customers with the overall reduction of their electric bills. Information regarding these programs is located on our website www.pepco.com.

For your review I have attached copies of the bills that were referenced in this response.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: How is the business justified to increase my bill by 9% year over year when my usage is just about the same. This is a rip-off.

Regards,

Business

Response:

November 15, 2013

**. [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant

Revdex.com 1411 K St., N.W. 10* Floor Washington, D.C. 20005-3404

Dear **. [redacted]:

This letter serves to address **. [redacted]’s rebuttal to my previous response. Please know the General Terms and Conditions for Furnishing Electric Service in Maryland (GTC), page 6, section 2, states in part, “The Company will furnish electric service to Customers under the filed rate schedules and in accordance with these “General Terms and Conditions” and its “Electric Service—Rules and

Regulations”......These “General Terms and Conditions” and the terms and provisions of the various rate

schedules are subject to change at any time as approved by the Commission”.

As previously stated, on July 12, 2013, the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) announced its decision in Pepco’s base rate case authorizing a $27.9 million increase in electric distribution rates. This amount is approximately 46% of the $60.8 million original base rate adjustment that Pepco requested on November 29, 2012. The PSC also granted a grid resiliency surcharge ($24 million). As a result of this order and in accordance with the GTC, the distribution rates were revised. To that end, the new rates were used to calculate the energy charges on our Maryland customers’ bills, beginning August 1, 2013.

Please understand that distribution rate case filings are the primary tool that the Company uses to increase revenues to recover investments in the system. These filings are legal proceedings and the process is similar to a legal trial. The key steps are outlined below:

o Initial application for rate increase, including testimony from Company witnesses and outside consultants, significant accounting and financial information,

o Discovery data requests o Intervenor testimony/ Company rebuttal

o Commission hearings o Briefs/ Reply briefs

o Commission order

Pepco’s rate filing on November 29, 2012 was for the recovery of reliability investments in Maryland. Moreover, the filing responded to the recommendations of the Maryland Grid Resiliency Task Force. From September 2010 through September 2012, Maryland customers experienced 38% fewer outages and a 36%o decrease in the duration of outages. Pepco expects further improvements for the remainder of 2013 and beyond as the company continues this reliability work. The Company expects to spend approximately one billion over the next five years to improve reliability and modernize the grid that is used by our Maryland customers. For these reasons, we believe the rate increase was warranted.I hope the additional information will help to alleviate **. [redacted]’s concerns. For your review I have attached copies of the tariff that was referenced in this response.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: The Revdex.com is passing on it? Pepco is stealing with 9% increase in pricing and this is legit and the Revdex.com is passing on it? Is this America or Communist China??? Why is the Revdex.com afraid to get involved when the stealing is so blatant? I am then considering to go to the media with all this and will expose Pepco, the Revdex.com and all involved, for their support of Pepco's stealing. 9% increase year over year and you agree with Pepco, really?

Regards,

Review: I moved into my apartment at [redacted], MD [redacted], which is located with the [redacted] Apartment Complex in April of 2012. Upon signing my lease, I was informed by management that I would be responsible for paying for water and power and that I had to sign up with Pepco. I signed the necessary paperwork given to me by the leasing agent authorizing Pepco to begin billing me monthly for electricity. After signing the necessary paperwork, I handed them all back to the leasing agent, left the rental office and returned to my apartment.

Fast forward to July of 2013, one day I received a bill in the mail from Pepco informing me that I owed $1500+ dollars for a billing period from May 2012 to July 2013. Upon receiving this bill I contacted Pepco to discuss why this occurred and how they expected me to pay such a large amount all at once. The representative told me my bill was held in billing department for the above stated time period and that it was an unfortunate regular occurrence. She then suggested a payment plan. Yet I informed her that it would be difficult to maintain such a large bill and that I felt it was in fact their fault for the billing error. No apology or attempt to make right on their error has ever been made.

On Friday, June 27, 2014, the power in my apartment was disconnected. Pepco dispatched a technician to my home to inform me that my power was being disconnected for non payment and to also attempt to collect payment. I informed the technician that I spoke with someone on Monday regarding the matter and he again attempted to collect payment, but when I informed him that I did not have the money to make the payment he handed me a green card informing me that the power in my apartment was indeed being turned off that day. He then left and proceeded to the outside of my apartment building where he located my power meter and disconnected the power. I have two small children along with my girlfriend residing in my home. No one at Pepco seemed to care about that factor. I eventually paid the ridiculous amount later in the day on June 27, 2014, however my power remained disconnected the entire weekend and even into Monday, June 30, 2014.Desired Settlement: I would like for PEPCO to refund me for the entire amount of the bill I paid, including all the fees associated with the disconnection and reconnection of my power. I would like for PEPCO to reimburse me for the food that I lost due to my power being turned off for days at a time. I would also like for PEPCO to pay me for my and my family's pain and suffering due to having to find somewhere for us to stay due to our power being disconnected. I would also like an apology for all of the inconvenience and frustration that this incident has caused myself and my family.

Business

Response:

July 7, 2014Dear **. [redacted]:This letter serves to respond to the concerns express by the above referenced customer regarding the delay in the billing of the account. I have reviewed this matter and would like to offer the following information. Review of our records reflects that on April 19, 2012 the customer applied for service at the above referenced address. Unfortunately, due to a system error we were experiencing at the time, there was a delay in activating the account. Consequently, On July 9, 2013, a bill was generated for service from April 19, 2012 to July 2, 2013, in the amount of $1,595.42.On December 10, 2013, the customer contacted our office and established a Time-Payment-Arrangement (TPA) on the total bill of $1,895.88, However, he defaulted on the arrangements, and the TPA was canceled on March 6, 2014. Subsequently, on June 27, 2014, the account was disconnected for nonpayment. The customer made 2 payment transactions on that day to have the service restored; however, only one payment could be verified. Unfortunately, the second payment the customer made through [redacted] could not be verified immediately that day. On June 30, 2014, the payment was verified and the service was reconnected. While Pepco cannot refund any payments made for services rendered, please extend our sincere apologies to the customer for any frustration or inconvenience the delay in billing has caused. If the customer wishes to file a claim for food loss as a result of the disconnection, he may contact our Claims Department at ###-###-####.Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond, responding to the customer’s concerns.

Review: In 2012 I had placed my name and debit card on an account with **. [redacted].

In December of 2012 I took my name off the account. However, Pepco continued to use my debit

card for payment of said account until I found out in April 2014 and placed a block on my credit union account. Pepco is claiming they still had authorization to take my money even though I had taken my name off the account...This is robbery.Desired Settlement: Ive made numerous calls to pepco about this and requested a manager call me..they never did they further tried to charge my account on 5/8/14 but were blocked from doing so. I want my money returned and I want them to stop charging me for someone elses electric bill

Business

Response:

Hello **. [redacted]:

In order to conduct an investigation into the **. [redacted]'s concerns, we need the Pepco account number. Our records do not reflect a metered account at [redacted], MD [redacted].

Please forward the information to the special investigations mailbox.

Thank you,

Office: [redacted]

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

The account number was #[redacted]

Regards,

Business

Response:

Hello **. [redacted],

I received the faxed information and will process the refund. The refund check will generate within 7 - 10 business days to the address on the ID.

Thank you,

Office: ###-###-####

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

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

Regards,

Review: Pepco account # [redacted]

On Feb 9th I received a bill from Pepco for $212.07 (1768 kwh used). This was much much higher than any previous bill I had received from Pepco (usually ~64 kwh used). I called Pepco on 2/11/13 for an explanation. I was told that my previous bills had been based on estimated meter readings rather than actual meter readings and that my new, much higher, bill reflected actual usage. When I asked when the actual meter readings were taken, I was told mid-July 2012 (meter reading 830) and Jan. 2013 (meter reading 2598).

This upset me because I did not move into my apartment until Aug. 23, 2012. If no meter reading was taken on Aug. 23, then PEPCO does not know the starting point for my bill and I am paying for some unknown power usage between July and Aug. 23, 2012 that was not used by me. My apartment was still under construction during this time so the construction crews were no doubt using large quantities of electricity to run power tools, shop lights, etc.

I complained about this situation to Pepco and was told a higher level representative would call me back. I never received a call back.

On Feb 22, I received a revised bill via email. This bill has a revised total due of $49.62 and now showed a previous meter reading of 2227 and present reading of 2598. I called PEPCO for an explanation of this revision. I was told that my record now showed an ACTUAL meter reading was taken on Aug. 23 (576) and another ACTUAL meter reading was taken on Jan. 9th (2227).

I don't understand how my account record now shows multiple actual meter readings when I was previously told that the only actual meter readings were taken in July 2012 and January 2012. These new supposedly actual meter readings magically appeared on my account between Feb 11 when I called and complained to PEPCO and today (Feb 22) when I received the revised bill.

I do not believe that Pepco actually took a meter reading on Aug. 23, 2012 (the day I moved into my apartment). I do not believe Pepco actually knows or can prove how much electricity I have consumed. Without an accurate, actual reading of my electric meter on the day of my start of service, PEPCO should not be able to charge me for electric service.Desired Settlement: Since PEPCO cannot accurately tell me how much energy I used between Aug. 23, 2012 and Jan. 9th, 2013 (the date I moved in to the date of the next actual meter reading) I would like a full refund of all of those charges.

I'm quite confident that if I take this case to small claims court, a judge would rule that if PEPCO cannot prove electricity usage between those dates, my charges would be null and void.

Business

Response:

See Attachment

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

Each of the three different people I have communicated with at PEPCO has told me different dates for the actual vs estimated meter readings. I'm tired of dealing with this.

Regards,

Review: When I moved to new place operator who connected the service made a mistake in one number.

After one month, this problem was "corrected", but Pepco was billing me at the different address for electricity I never consumed.

They told me that everything is resolved and I dont need to pay this bill, which is Pepco's "mistake"

Today I discovered that this debt was sold to collectors and now they're hunting for me.

I consider this behavior completely unprofessional. Now I had to battle people I know nothing about for a debt I never had, just because Pepco's employee mixed two numbers in my addressDesired Settlement: 1. Communicate to collectors I dont own anything

2. Provide me a written statement that I dont owe anything to Pepco

Business

Response:

June 23, 2014Dear **. [redacted]:This is in response to complaint #10084419 filed with your office on June 9, 2014 regarding **. [redacted]’s billing concerns. We appreciate **. [redacted] for bringing his concerns to our attention.As a result of a clerical error, in April 2014 an account was erroneously and inadvertently established in the consumer’s name at [redacted]23 [redacted] Drive, instead of [redacted]32 [redacted] Drive. Subsequently, the account was closed; however, billing adjustments were incomplete, which resulted in a final bill balance.Please know billing corrections has been completed and the consumer will not be charged for any bills associated with [redacted]23 [redacted] Drive, as the account was established in error. We have notified the collection agency and retracted the account from further collection activity.We apologize for any inconvenience this matter may have caused the consumer and appreciate his patience and understanding while this matter was being resolved.I trust the information provided will assist you in responding to **. [redacted]’s concerns.Sincerely

Review: The company installed a wireless meter, though it was expressed that such a device is harmful to health and not desired, it disconnected services without the property owner initiating such a disconnection, they've lied, threatened, and have continued this highly unprofessional behavior, even though the company was reported to the Revdex.com in the past, nothing was resolved, only more lies, this unacceptable.Desired Settlement: I want an accurate bill, and the wireless device removed . . . the lumpen-business is a shame to be called an American business, what happened, did [redacted] buy Pepco?

Business

Response:

September 25, 2013

Dear **. [redacted]:

This letter serves as a response to Complaint No: [redacted] on behalf of [redacted] that was received on September 16, 2013.

The metering records indicate on May 19, 2013, a technician was granted access inside the premise to exchange the meter to a smart meter. Per The General Terms and Conditions for the District of Columbia (GTC), Page 8 & 9, Section 2: Metering (attached); the meter is company owned equipment that is used for the purpose of measuring and billing electric usage. The GTC also provides assurance that Pepco must have access to our equipment from a safety and maintenance perspective.

The District of Columbia approved the installation of smart meters in homes and businesses across our service territory. Please understand that the District of Columbia law authorizing the installation of smart meters does not contain an opt-out provision; therefore, we must respectfully deny the customer’s request to have the smart meter removed. Lastly, the smart meter was not the cause of the recent power outage experienced on September 9, 2013. The momentary outage was caused by a tree limb coming into contact with the distribution wires.

I trust this response has resolved all complaint referenced above. Customers are encouraged to visit our website at www.pepco.com/enerqy/blueprint/smetersdc.

Sincerely

Review: Cannot get a status of inspection for solar panels that were installed over a month ago.Desired Settlement: Send a person to my house to inspect solar panels so that I can start using it.

Business

Response:

December 2, 2014Dear [redacted]:This is in response to an inquiry from [redacted] on the status of his green solar power interconnection application.On November 14, 2014, I contacted [redacted] to acknowledge his inquiry and to advise him that we were waiting to receive a corrected Net Energy Meter interconnection application from his solar contractor. On November 20, 2014, Pepco received the corrected application and a work order request has been established to install a net energy meter. On November 26, 2014, a net energy meter was installed. The customer will receive the approval to operate from Pepco's Green Power Connection team within the next 7 to 15 business days.[redacted] has my contact information should he need any further assistance regarding this matter.Sincerely,Linda B.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. PEPCO needs to have a better process keeping customers informed and being proactive with resolving solar panel installs.

Regards,

Review: I recently had solar shingles installed on my roof. Paperwork has been submitted to Pepco to have a Net Energy Meter installed at my residence as of Monday June 23, 2014. I was originally contacting them to see if they had received all paperwork to began processing the request. I left a voice mail message with the Green Power Connection team of Pepco which states that if you leave a message they will respond within 3 business days. I waited the 3 business days and attempted to call them back and still no response; I then left two emails throughout the course of the week. The following week Monday June 30- Thursday Jul 3, I spoke with customer service representatives who were unable to contact the Green Power Connection Team or allow me to talk to a customer service representative supervisor. One incident I was told a supervisor would contact me within and hour and the next I was told a supervisor would contact me within 24 hours. None of the responses have happened that would make 5 total times that Pepco has lied to me on different occasions. The customer service line is a joke seeing as how they cannot see the status, talk to live person, or see the scheduling of any other department. There only solution is to email or call a number that goes directly to voicemail when dealing with another department (making the customer wait). I have seen this first hand with the Green Power Connection & now the Net Metering Department. Practically 15 Business days have gone by and I have still yet to receive a response or real status update on how long this process is supposed to take or if it is almost over. Pepco has no care or concern about their customers outside of billing.Desired Settlement: I would like to be contacted by phone and alerted as to when my net energy meter will be installed as well as when I will be given authority to operate my solar system. At the very least I would like a realistic status update with some kind of time frame/duration (by phone/ in person). I would love to know the average amount of time this process is supposed to actually take or hear a list of the steps to demonstrate why process has taken so long.

I would like for Pepco to fix there system; customer service representatives are not of much help if they cannot see appointments or notes and statuses of jobs scheduled by other departments. Records should be transparent throughout the company or customer service representatives should be placed within all departments to share information back and forth about any particular department.

Business

Response:

Pepco’s Green Power Team received the signed Certificate of Completion and inspection sticker for the customer’s solar equipment on July 2, 2014. On July 7, 2014, a request was issued to have the Net Energy Meter (NEM) installed. On July 7, 2014, we acknowledged receipt of the Certificate of Completion documents with an email to both the contractor and the customer. A NEM meter was installed on July 11, 2014. The customer will be notified when they have been approved to operate.On July 16, 2014, **. [redacted] of Pepco’s Green Power Team spoke with the customer to address the concerns voiced in this complaint. She provided information regarding the Green Power Connection Team’s process of handling applications, confirmed receipt of his certification of completion and the installation of the Net Energy Meter. She further apologized that we did not meet his customer service expectations.We take our customer service goals very seriously and we sincerely apologize that we failed to provide the level of customer service that the customer should expect. This complaint has been forwarded to the Leadership of the Green Power Team for training and process improvement purposes.I hope this information is helpful in responding to the customer’s concerns.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. The company has apologized to me in regards to not contacting me in a timely fashion. We both agreed that had I been contacted by phone and communication was not completely unavailable a lot of these issues could have been avoided.I would like to make the following note for record purposes:

I called and left a voice mail message (At this point I simply wanted to verify that application was sent in and received by Pepco from the Solar Installation company) on Wed June 25, 2014 the voice mail recording

stated I would be contacted within 3 business days which did not

happen. Which is why I reached out via email and additional phone calls to Pepco customer service to see if Solar Meter was

scheduled to be installed. As a customer I had no real way of verifying that the company that installed my solar system did indeed submit the application on the date of Monday June 23, 2014 (Which according to Pepco had not been received until July 2) . I did not receive any form of response until

July 7 2014 after a complaint had been filed. The July 7th email message sent out did not suffice after all the build up and unresponsive I received from Pepco; I still had a lot of uncertainties which mandated and call from Pepco which I did not receive until July 16th 2014.The representative from Pepco stated they would be working on the issues of Customer Service not being able to give status updates of all Departments. This corrective measure is supposed to take place sometime in 2015; as of now Customer service cannot tell you in a timely fashion what is going on within the Green Power Connection department or the Net metering department. Unfortunately I will not be able to confirm that they made these changes unless I add more green power (wind turbines) in 2015 and start the process of tying clean energy to their grid all over again.In short the problems are still existent, I'm only considering this resolution closed because of the apology

Regards,

Review: Last May 2013 Pepco replaced our old meter with a Smart Meter.The technician ripped the meter from the house foundationand said someone from Pepco will come out to fix it.It took Pepco 6 months to send someone out and he still could not fix the meter.I called the Pepco emergency line and they sent someone out last Sunday,June 1, and the technician said for me to put and additional wooden boardand call Pepco again.This morning a meter technician comes out and says he still cant fix the problem because the cables have to be dug out.Any help from your office would be greatly appreciated.Thank you.[redacted]Desired Settlement: All we want is for Pepco to come in and fix the problem before our house starts to develop molds because of the opening in the foundation

Business

Response:

June 27, 2014Dear [redacted]:Although **. [redacted]’s complaint was received by Pepco on June 23, 2014, her concerns were submitted to the Revdex.com on June 3, 2014.As indicated in the attached response to the Maryland Public Service Commission dated June 10, 2014 and the June 13, 2014 response to **. [redacted], Esquire; permanent repairs were completed on June 4, 2014.Thank you for bringing **. [redacted]’s concerns to our attention and for allowing me the opportunity to respond to his concerns.