Dear [redacted],
Source Power & Gas LLC (“Source”) received your complaint filed with the Houston Revdex.com (Revdex.com), regarding electric service at [redacted] DR, HOUSTON, TX, 77096. To summarize your complaint, you feel you are not responsible for the bill for the...
address noted above. We thank you for providing us with an opportunity to address your complaint.
In addressing your complaint, we researched your account’s history and pulled all email and phone recordings of conversations with you and your spouse. Your husband, [redacted], enrolled the above referenced address online with Source on 5/17/2014 (enrollment confirmation email is attached). The first phone call that we have on record was a call from [redacted] on 5/19/2014. He called to verify that the priority move-in at the above referenced address was being completed on 5/19/2014 as requested. Customer Care Representative Yesenia verified that the priority move-in would be complete either that day or the following day. There was no mention in this conversation about an apartment number.
The first bill for [redacted], account [redacted]-[redacted], for the address of [redacted] Dr, Houston, TX 77096 was generated and emailed on 6/16/2014 in the amount of $12,990.68. This bill was followed by a web inquiry from [redacted], alleging that Source had made a huge mistake on the bill. [redacted] then called Source on 6/16/2014 and spoke with Customer Care Representative [redacted]. [redacted] checked the notes on [redacted]’s account and informed [redacted] that Source was disputing the usage with CenterPoint Energy on their behalf. CenterPoint Energy is the entity that provides the meter reads to Source and the entity who also bills Source for delivery charges incurred by customers of Source.
On 6/26/2014, CenterPoint responded to Source’s usage dispute and stated that the usage is in line with historical usage. They also went on to disclose that this address is an apartment complex. This was the first time that Source was aware that we were dealing with a situation where the customer switched the service for an apartment complex rather than switching the service for a residential dwelling. At this point, Source did some research and found that this particular address [redacted] Dr, Houston, TX 77096 has three ESI IDs associated with it, but none of the three ESI IDs are associated with an apartment number. Further research and conversations uncovered that the apartment complex is on a master meter, and the apartment complex pays for all electricity due to this meter arrangement. Individual apartment dwellers do not have the opportunity to select their own retail electricity supplier.
According to the [redacted]s, the apartment management did not disclose to them that electricity was handled by the apartment complex. When Source uncovered all of these details, Source determined that they would need to open a MarkeTrak (electronic means of communicating with the transmission and distribution providers and/or other retail electricity providers) in order to return the apartment complex to their previous provider. This MarkeTrak was opened by Source on 6/26/2014, and the MarkeTrak process was completed on 7/21/2014 at which time the apartment complex was returned to the previous provider. Unfortunately, inadvertent switches like this result in a one day bill being issued to the retail electricity provider through which the inadvertent switch occurred, Source in this particular situation.
In conversations between Source and the [redacted]s, the [redacted]s insisted that they were not responsible for the switch of the apartment complex. The Customer Care Director [redacted] attempted to explain to them that Mr. [redacted] inadvertently selected the apartment complex ESI ID to switch during the enrollment process. As we noted in this response earlier, there are no ESI IDs associated with any of the individual apartments at this address, so when Mr. [redacted] entered this address during the online enrollment process, he would have selected the ESI ID for the apartment complex and it would not have noted any particular apartment number. We also want to point out that our online enrollment process makes the person doing the online enrollment select a specific address and associated ESI ID before the enrollment process will continue, it will not populate and continue without a specific address and ESI ID being actively selected by the person doing the online enrollment.
Source owes CenterPoint Energy for the delivery charges for the priority move-in and the usage for the one day period, and Source also owes ERCOT for settlement charges for that one day period. After the MarkeTrak to return the apartment complex to their previous electricity provider, this one day time period resulted in a new amount due of $976.10. $611.60 of these charges Source had to pay to CenterPoint Energy on your behalf for their delivery tariff charges. The rest of the bill is comprised of energy charges owed to Source plus the applicable taxes on the energy charge.
During our research into your complaint, we determined that your spouse, [redacted], completed the online enrollment by himself, during which process he enrolled the wrong ESI ID. Instead of enrolling the ESI ID for your apartment (which didn’t exist since the apartment complex is on a master meter), he enrolled the ESI ID for the apartment complex which resulted in a much higher bill amount than expected. Customer Care Director [redacted] explained to you that we were not able to bill the apartment complex for the one day of usage because we didn’t have a contract in place with the apartment complex; we have a contract with you. She also suggested to you that you discuss the situation with your apartment complex since her understanding was that the apartment complex manager didn’t explain to you that they take care of the electricity bills rather than each separate apartment managing their own electricity.
We would like to discuss your account with you to better understand why you feel that you are not responsible for the charges. We take your complaint very seriously, and we are interested in resolving it. Our goal is to provide excellent customer service to each of our customers. We believe that in this current situation, we took the appropriate action to resolve your situation which resulted after [redacted] inadvertently switched the apartment complex meter to Source. This situation resulted in an amount outstanding of $976.10. Please note that there are no late payment penalties or early termination fee included in this amount outstanding. According to our contract with you, we could have held you responsible for a late payment penalty as well as an early termination fee, but we chose to waive both of these contractual fees out of courtesy due to the unfortunate situation in which you found yourself.
Out of the spirit of compromise and customer service, we are willing to split the cost obligations resulting from your switching of the apartment complex account. If you pay the TDSP charges of $611.60 including tax, we will pay the energy charges including tax ($364.50), and this amount will be waived for you.
Total Amt Due, incl tax $976.10
Amt Due not incl tax Tax Amt Total Due
TDSP $593.96 $17.64 $611.60
Energy $353.25 $11.25 $364.50
Another alternative is to get your apartment complex office to pay the total amount due for the one day of service. Perhaps a call or visit from you would encourage them to do the right thing and pay the invoice for the electricity they received. If you are unable to persuade them then, in essence, the apartment complex is getting this electricity for free, assuming you agree to the above settlement.
Please let us know your thoughts as soon as possible.
[redacted]
Dear [redacted],
Source Power & Gas LLC (“Source”) received your complaint filed with the Houston Revdex.com (Revdex.com), regarding electric service at [redacted] DR, HOUSTON, TX, 77096. To summarize your complaint, you feel you are not responsible for the bill for the...
address noted above. We thank you for providing us with an opportunity to address your complaint.
In addressing your complaint, we researched your account’s history and pulled all email and phone recordings of conversations with you and your spouse. Your husband, [redacted], enrolled the above referenced address online with Source on 5/17/2014 (enrollment confirmation email is attached). The first phone call that we have on record was a call from [redacted] on 5/19/2014. He called to verify that the priority move-in at the above referenced address was being completed on 5/19/2014 as requested. Customer Care Representative Yesenia verified that the priority move-in would be complete either that day or the following day. There was no mention in this conversation about an apartment number.
The first bill for [redacted], account [redacted]-[redacted], for the address of [redacted] Dr, Houston, TX 77096 was generated and emailed on 6/16/2014 in the amount of $12,990.68. This bill was followed by a web inquiry from [redacted], alleging that Source had made a huge mistake on the bill. [redacted] then called Source on 6/16/2014 and spoke with Customer Care Representative [redacted]. [redacted] checked the notes on [redacted]’s account and informed [redacted] that Source was disputing the usage with CenterPoint Energy on their behalf. CenterPoint Energy is the entity that provides the meter reads to Source and the entity who also bills Source for delivery charges incurred by customers of Source.
On 6/26/2014, CenterPoint responded to Source’s usage dispute and stated that the usage is in line with historical usage. They also went on to disclose that this address is an apartment complex. This was the first time that Source was aware that we were dealing with a situation where the customer switched the service for an apartment complex rather than switching the service for a residential dwelling. At this point, Source did some research and found that this particular address [redacted] Dr, Houston, TX 77096 has three ESI IDs associated with it, but none of the three ESI IDs are associated with an apartment number. Further research and conversations uncovered that the apartment complex is on a master meter, and the apartment complex pays for all electricity due to this meter arrangement. Individual apartment dwellers do not have the opportunity to select their own retail electricity supplier.
According to the [redacted]s, the apartment management did not disclose to them that electricity was handled by the apartment complex. When Source uncovered all of these details, Source determined that they would need to open a MarkeTrak (electronic means of communicating with the transmission and distribution providers and/or other retail electricity providers) in order to return the apartment complex to their previous provider. This MarkeTrak was opened by Source on 6/26/2014, and the MarkeTrak process was completed on 7/21/2014 at which time the apartment complex was returned to the previous provider. Unfortunately, inadvertent switches like this result in a one day bill being issued to the retail electricity provider through which the inadvertent switch occurred, Source in this particular situation.
In conversations between Source and the [redacted]s, the [redacted]s insisted that they were not responsible for the switch of the apartment complex. The Customer Care Director [redacted] attempted to explain to them that Mr. [redacted] inadvertently selected the apartment complex ESI ID to switch during the enrollment process. As we noted in this response earlier, there are no ESI IDs associated with any of the individual apartments at this address, so when Mr. [redacted] entered this address during the online enrollment process, he would have selected the ESI ID for the apartment complex and it would not have noted any particular apartment number. We also want to point out that our online enrollment process makes the person doing the online enrollment select a specific address and associated ESI ID before the enrollment process will continue, it will not populate and continue without a specific address and ESI ID being actively selected by the person doing the online enrollment.
Source owes CenterPoint Energy for the delivery charges for the priority move-in and the usage for the one day period, and Source also owes ERCOT for settlement charges for that one day period. After the MarkeTrak to return the apartment complex to their previous electricity provider, this one day time period resulted in a new amount due of $976.10. $611.60 of these charges Source had to pay to CenterPoint Energy on your behalf for their delivery tariff charges. The rest of the bill is comprised of energy charges owed to Source plus the applicable taxes on the energy charge.
During our research into your complaint, we determined that your spouse, [redacted], completed the online enrollment by himself, during which process he enrolled the wrong ESI ID. Instead of enrolling the ESI ID for your apartment (which didn’t exist since the apartment complex is on a master meter), he enrolled the ESI ID for the apartment complex which resulted in a much higher bill amount than expected. Customer Care Director [redacted] explained to you that we were not able to bill the apartment complex for the one day of usage because we didn’t have a contract in place with the apartment complex; we have a contract with you. She also suggested to you that you discuss the situation with your apartment complex since her understanding was that the apartment complex manager didn’t explain to you that they take care of the electricity bills rather than each separate apartment managing their own electricity.
We would like to discuss your account with you to better understand why you feel that you are not responsible for the charges. We take your complaint very seriously, and we are interested in resolving it. Our goal is to provide excellent customer service to each of our customers. We believe that in this current situation, we took the appropriate action to resolve your situation which resulted after [redacted] inadvertently switched the apartment complex meter to Source. This situation resulted in an amount outstanding of $976.10. Please note that there are no late payment penalties or early termination fee included in this amount outstanding. According to our contract with you, we could have held you responsible for a late payment penalty as well as an early termination fee, but we chose to waive both of these contractual fees out of courtesy due to the unfortunate situation in which you found yourself.
Out of the spirit of compromise and customer service, we are willing to split the cost obligations resulting from your switching of the apartment complex account. If you pay the TDSP charges of $611.60 including tax, we will pay the energy charges including tax ($364.50), and this amount will be waived for you.
Total Amt Due, incl tax $976.10
Amt Due not incl tax Tax Amt Total Due
TDSP $593.96 $17.64 $611.60
Energy $353.25 $11.25 $364.50
Another alternative is to get your apartment complex office to pay the total amount due for the one day of service. Perhaps a call or visit from you would encourage them to do the right thing and pay the invoice for the electricity they received. If you are unable to persuade them then, in essence, the apartment complex is getting this electricity for free, assuming you agree to the above settlement.
Please let us know your thoughts as soon as possible.
[redacted]