The Tufnut Works

[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]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Mr. P[redacted] Refuses to acknowledge that due to Pepco's customer relations failures, the delivery of a refund check to me was delayed for two months.  If my payment to Pepco were delayed for two months, Pepco would charge me late fees and interest, but Pepco claims to have no process to do the same for customers when it keeps their monies and ignores repeated dunning.  This is unacceptable for a modern business.
Regards,
[redacted]

Harvey H**,  Escalated InvestigationsCustomer Relations, Research & Resolution ###-###-####701 Ninth Street, NW Washington, DC 20068January 8, 2015[redacted] The Revdex.com 1411 K St NW, 10" Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404RE: [redacted]...

Bethesda, Maryland [redacted]Dear [redacted]:This is in response to complaint #[redacted], regarding [redacted]'s billing concerns for the above referenced account. We appreciate the consumer for bringing her concerns to our attention.Deposits are requested of customers establishing credit, who have maintained a less than satisfactory payment record over a 12 month period, or due to service interruption for nonpayment of an outstanding bill. We sincerely apologize that the consumer was not informed of the deposit of $145.00, when the electric service account was established on November 2, 2015. On a customer relations basis, this initial deposit requirement of $145.00 has been removed.I appreciate the opportunity to respond and trust this information will serve to satisfactorily resolve [redacted]'s concerns. If you should have any questions, please contact me at the telephone number referenced above.Sincerely,Harvey H**

December 15, 2016Mr. [redacted] Revdex.com 1411 K Street, NW, 10" Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404Re: [redacted] Complaint #[redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted]:This letter serves to address Mr. [redacted]'s ongoing concerns regarding the billing of his account. While I understand his concerns, the mailing the customer is referring to (Welcome Letter) that was attached to our initial response on November 30, 2016, was mailed to the address that he has moved to; listing all the programs that he was currently enrolled in. In addition, as previously stated in our initial response, in the interest of good customer service, any late fees that were assessed were waived.Please extend our sincere apologies to the customer for any frustration or inconvenience he may have experienced during the establishment of his new account.Sincerely Stan P

September 28, 2016*** *** *** The Revdex.com 1411 K St. NW, 10" Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404RE: *** *** *** *** *** *** Rockville, Maryland *** Account Number *** *** ***Dear *** ***:This is in response to complaint #*** regarding *** ***'s...

billing concerns for the above referenced account. I regret it was necessary for *** *** to contact us more than once to have her billing issue addressed and I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience *** *** may have experienced as a result.I have confirmed that *** *** submitted an on-line request on July 5, 2016 to start service at *** *** *** *** #***, Rockville, Maryland ***; however, the request was processed on July 12, 2016, with a start date of July 12, 2016. As a result of the incorrect start date, *** *** stated that she incurred an apartment management company fee in the amount of $38.08, which she is seeking reimbursement from Pepco.On September 28, 2016, spoke with *** *** regarding her request for a credit of $38,08. On a customer relations basis, a credit adjustment of $38.08 has been applied to the customer's Pepco account, which will reflect on the next billing statement. *** *** was satisfied with the outcome.I appreciate the opportunity to respond. If you should have any questions, please contact me at the telephone number referenced above.Sincerely,Harvey H

This is in response to complaint #[redacted], regarding Mr. [redacted]'s billing concerns for the above referenced account. I have reviewed the consumer's account and would like to offer the following information.Our goal is to bill consumers based on actual monthly meter readings; however, there may be...

circumstances (i.e., meter inaccessibility, inconsistent meter data, communication issues between the meter data management system and the billing system, etc.), which may result in the use of estimated meter data. However, as meters record electricity cumulatively, each subsequent actual meter reading serves to confirm the accuracy of the preceding billing. Therefore, in instances when an estimated meter reading is used, any difference between estimated and actual consumption is identified through subsequent actual meter readings.Mr. [redacted] has been the responsible party of record at the above referenced address since May 11, 2012. Attached is a billing history from May 11, 2012 to June 5, 2015. Our records indicate that the initial bill from May 11, 2012 to July 2, 2012 was based on actual meter readings (951 to 1101). However, the monthly service bills from July 2, 2012 to March 6, 2015 were based on estimated meter readings (1101 to 6084).Subsequently, a bill was rendered for service from March 7, 2015 to May 7, 2015 (meter readings 6084 to 18265, respectively) for 12,181 kilowatt hours in the amount of $1,251.41. This is a true up bill for the previously estimated bills from July 2, 2012 to March 6, 2015, which have been under-billed. This true-up bill was followed by the current bill from May 8, 2015 to June 5, 2015, which was based on actual meter readings (18265 to 18471, respectively).Based on our review, the bills from May 11, 2012 to June 5, 2015, are a reflection of the usage as recorded by the meter. The bill from March 7, 2015 to May 7, 2015 is a catch up bill for the previously under estimated monthly service bills from July 2, 2012 to March 6, 2015.Upon further review of our records, we identified that at an actual meter reading of 16419 on December 3, 2014 was obtained by our meter reader; however, the reading was not used to true up the account in December 2014, and the bills continued to be estimated.On a customer relations basis, we opted not to hold Mr. [redacted] responsible for the underestimated bills from July 2, 2012 to December 3, 2014. The following corrective measures were taken to true up Mr. [redacted]'s account from December 3, 2014 to June 5, 2015. The bills from December 3, 2014 forward were cancelled and the meter reading for December 3, 2014 was corrected. Subsequently, a revised bill (attached) was rendered for service from December 3, 2014 to June 5, 2015, which was based on actual meter readings (16419 to 18471) for 2052 kwh in the amount of $285.85. After deducting payments of $1,435.38 received during this period, a credit balance of $1,097.43 remains. The customer's next bill will be rendered on or about July 10, 2015. Once the bill posts to the account we will issue a refund for the remaining credit balance.The communication issue between the meter data management system and the billing system has been resolved. Going forward, the consumer can expect to receive monthly bills based on actual meter readings.We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience the consumer may have experienced as a result of this billing matter and trust this information will serve to satisfactorily resolve Mr. [redacted]'s concerns. If you should have any questions, please contact me.Sincerely,Harvey H**

[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 as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:Their may be no operational or safety hazards to the equipment on our property, but I stated in my last rejection, we purchased a new home. by purchasing a new home, the premise is that the home and the property is not damaged. The damage was done prior to us closing on our home. My wife and I have file an official complaint with the State of Maryland, Office of the Attorney General, Consumer Protection Division; Case number: **-[redacted]; with this issue being one of our grievances. I hope that Pepco and the builder, [redacted], can come to an agreement and properly correct this issue. It should not be the customer to fit the bill for corrective action. Please let me know if any further information is required.
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear [redacted]:   This letter serves to respond to the above referenced customer’s concerns regarding the poor customer service they received while attempting to resolve a double payment transaction.  I have reviewed the manner in which this issue was handled and appreciate the...

opportunity to offer the following information.  First, I regret the customer’s experience with our Customer Service Representatives was unsatisfactory.  Please understand we hold our employees to a high standard of professionalism and courteousness during any customer interaction.  I will ensure that the customer’s concerns are forwarded to the manager of that department for immediate handling.   Review of the account reflects that the customer was not billed for April 4 and April 6.  Instead, there were two payment transactions that occurred on those two dates.  On February 25, 2017, a bill was rendered for service from January 27 to February 24, 2017, in the amount of $332.19 that was due March 20, 2017.  The customer’s payment transaction reflects that on March 21, 2017, the customer made an online payment transaction through Speedpay in the amount of $332.19.  Unfortunately, however, during that time period “Speedpay’ was having system issues with processing payments in a timely manner.  Therefore, the customer’s payment was not debited from his bank account until April 4, 2017.   In the interim, on March 27, 2017, another bill was rendered for service from February 25 to March 24, 2017, in the amount of $330.12 that was due April 17, 2017.  On April 6, 2017, the customer made an online payment transaction through Speedpay in the amount of $330.12.  By this time Speedpay had fixed the payment processing issue and the payment was processed on that day.  Thus, reflecting two payments in one month.   Again, I apologize for any frustration or any inconvenience the customer experienced as a result of his attempts to resolve this matter.                                           ...⇄ Sincerely                                               ...⇄ Stan P[redacted]

On June 19, 2017, Pepco received a request form [redacted] to
transfer service effective July 8, 2017 to service address [redacted] Washington, DC. The request was initiated however due to a system error
the transfer of service was not completed.
According to Pepco’s records,...

[redacted] contacted Customer
Service on September 26, 2017 regarding the status of the account. The account
was still impacted by the system error and was forwarded to the Pepco’s
applications technology team for review.
Service was terminated in error on October 18, 2017 with no
responsible party on record. A reconnection order was issued after [redacted]
contacted Customer Service regarding the outage. The request to establish an
account for [redacted] was initiated however due the system error the move in
was not completed.
A new account, account number [redacted], has been
successfully established for [redacted] effective July 8, 2017. The account has
been bill to current. The current account balance is $251.85. Pepco apologizes
for the inconvenience incurred by the customer. Pepco is willing to offer payment arrangements
at the customer’s request.

701 Ninth Street, NW Washington, DC 20068March 10, 2016[redacted] Landover, Maryland [redacted]Re: Account Number: [redacted]Dear [redacted]:This letter serves to acknowledge your recent inquiry received from the Revdex.com to have a payment arrangement...

re-established on your account. I have established an 11 month installment plan as follows:• An initial down payment of $52.00 is due March 30, 2016. No other payment will be due until the April 7, 2016 invoice is issued.• The remaining balance will be paid in 9 monthly installments of $52.00 with the final installment of $55.29. This installment amount will be in addition to your current monthly charges for the service period and the terms of this arrangement will be reflected on the next billing statement issued on April 7, 2016.Please note that the full amount of your bill becomes due if the terms in this agreement are notadhered to and your account will be subject to normal collection activity up to and includingdisconnection.Please feel free to contact me directly, if you have any further questions or concerns.Sincerely,Linda M. B Customer Relations Department (W) ###-###-####

[redacted] Washington, DC [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant Revdex.com 1411 K Street, NW, 10" Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404Dear [redacted] Customer Relations Research & Resolution [redacted]November 30, 2015Re: [redacted]...

[redacted] Silver Spring, Maryland [redacted] Complaint No: [redacted]This letter serves as a response to your inquiry on behalf of our mutual customer, **. [redacted]requesting invoices for service rendered.Upon further review of the billing records, we determined due to unforeseen delays in our billing system related to our Peak Energy Savings Credit program, no bills were rendered since the account commenced on July 27, 2015. This matter has been resolved, and attached is a copy of the bill for service rendered on July 27, 2015 to November 25, 2015, and charges totaling $114.87.We regret it took more than one attempt to get the assistance required. Further, we apologize for any inconvenience this matter has caused. If you have any additional questions, please contact me.Enclosure (6)Sincerely, *—[redacted]

[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]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
The response was just a repeat of information that I was already aware of because you spent most of your effort explaining the payment plan of a bill that was already satisfied instead of addressing a solution to the delay in billing your system experienced or the fact that there was a poor move made by the company by sending the notification out months too late. The $50 will be paid today on 12/15 but that still leaves $200 that we are expected to produce along with whatever chargers we generate in the next two months which will again cause our bill to be at least $300 in the upcoming future. I don't understand why I'm expected to pay a bulk bill due to the issues of a program that I don't even utilize. Please come up with a solution that better satisfies the needs of your customers and not just the company. Thank you.
Regards,
[redacted]

[redacted] Silver Spring, Maryland [redacted]Re: #[redacted]
Dear [redacted]:This is in response to your email dated September 22, 2016. I apologize if you feel that your inquiry has not been addressed. Based on your original complaint to the Revdex.com, I...

understood your concerns to be about the timing of the receipt of your bills, the amount of consumption on your bill and your unsatisfactory customer service experience. Additionally, you requested a test of your meter.I explained the following:• The bill for service to July 21, 2016 was delayed due to a billing review conducted after the net energy meter was exchanged.• I apologized for the inconvenience and confirmed that the account was not assessed any late charges due to the delay in the billing• Based on analysis of prior billing, I advised that your July usage did not appear to be 30% higher than usage in prior years. In fact, the 2014 July usage was higher than 2015 July usage. I provided a billing summary to support this.• I advised that the August billing showed a decrease in usage, consistent with an full month of billing following the installation of your solar array• I advised that, per your request, a meter test had been scheduled to test the accuracy of the meter.• Finally, I apologized for your experience with customer service and advised that your experience was shared with our Quality Leadership team.You remained unsatisfied with my response and provided additional information regarding your concerns about your bill from July 22, 2016 to August 22, 2016. You provided data about your total generation and believed that the billing was incorrect. You believed that the billing should reflect your total generation less your net usage measured by the meter. My response to you served to address this concern and I apologize if it did not clearly convey that information.The net meter does not measure total generation. A net energy meter measures the energy (kWh) drawn from the grid to the customer to supplement a customer’s consumption when needed (inflow), and any excess generation (when a customer produces more energy than is used in their home and sends energy from their home to the grid). Any energy generated is first fed inside the premise for use by appliances, electronics, lights, etc. and is not recorded by Pepco’s net meter.As indicated on your billing from July 22, 2016 to August 19, 2016, Pepco’s net meter recorded 1090 kWh drawn from the grid. In that same time period, 411 kWh of excess generation was fed onto the grid. You were billed for the net consumption of 679 kWh. Your system may have generated 1,109 kWh which is first fed inside the premise. The Pepco only measures what is in excess of your consumption, which in this case was 411 kWh. Per my prior response, the September 20, 2016 test of your net energy meter found that your meter was recording at an overall accuracy of 100%. This serves to confirm that your meter is accurately recording your excess generation and usage from the grid.I do apologize for your frustration, however and thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. At this time we believe we have conducted a fair and thorough investigation into this matter. Based on my review your account has been billed accurately.Thank you for the opportunity to respond. We value you as a customer and appreciate your business.Sincerely,Linda B

On May 31, 2017, Pepco was notified regarding a hole in the base of a transformer in front of [redacted] Upper Marlboro, MD. Pepco responded and visited the premise. The technician noted a small hole in the fiberglass and verified conditions were safe. A second call was received on...

June 1, 2017 in which Pepco responded. The technician determined that conditions were safe. It was then referred to Pepco’s Underground Engineering department. The hole in the base was repaired with epoxy. No further repairs are necessary as the epoxy serves as a permanent repair. Sarah M[redacted]Escalated Investigations Representative

April 18, 2016Mr. [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant Revdex.com 1411 K Street, NW, 10" Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404Re: [redacted]Pepco Account No. [redacted] Revdex.com Complaint No: [redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted]:This letter serves as a response to your inquiry received on behalf of our...

mutual customer, Mr. [redacted]. An investigation into the budget billing history was conducted and I offer you the following.In March 2015, the account was enrolled with Pepco's Budget Billing program, which is a 12 month equal installment plan derived from the accounts historical usage. The average monthly payment amount was $55.00, and February 2016 was the settlement month. The program year ended with a settlement balance of $1,140.07, payable by March 17, 2016.Upon further review of the billing records, we determined throughout the program year, the average payment amount should have been adjusted in the form of an increase to offset the accrued arrearages. An increase in the monthly payment would have reduced the Budget difference each month, which would have decreased the February 2016 settlement balance. Regretfully, an adjustment to the monthly average payment did not occur.Based on our findings, the Budget Bill program year ended with a large settlement balance that is payable until paid in full. Currently, the account balance due is $1,302.56, and payable by April 15, 2016. To afford the customer an opportunity to settle the balance, an extensive payment arrangement up to 32 months is available upon request. Our Call Center is available to accommodate the request and can be reached at ###-###-####.We apologize for the inconvenience this matter caused. I trust this information will assist you in responding to the customer's concerns.Sincerely, Stephanie R

August 31, 2015Dear [redacted]:Thank you for contacting me regarding your ongoing concerns. I realize this response has been delayed and I apologize for its lateness and appreciate your patience. I empathize with you regarding your losses and the anxiety you must have suffered due to the fire at your home. I regret any additional concerns the handling of your Pepco account may have caused you and I appreciate the time you’ve spent in resolving this issue. I would like to provide the following information to assist in clarifying the information I provided previously.On February 20, 2015 at 9:18 p.m., Pepco responded to a request from the Montgomery County Fire Department to send a crew to your home as the result of a fire. Pepco technicians pulled the meter from the socket to disconnect the service and the meter socket was covered for safety. The electric service remained energized (“hot”) up to the meter enclosure/cabinet.A service order was not generated after the meter was disconnected and therefore the account remained in an active billing status. This resulted in a bill being rendered on March 25, 2015 for the service period from February 14 to March 17, 2015. This bill was issued using estimated meter reading data, as the meter stopped communicating on February 20, 2015. Additionally, the usage graphs from February 20, 2015 forward were based on estimated meter reading data. The bill was subsequently cancelled and the account was closed retroactively to February 20, 2015.On April 3, 2015 you cancelled your online automatic payment enrollment. However, a payment of $328.07 was already pending based on the invoice rendered on March 25, 2015. Therefore, the payment was processed as part of the automatic payment instructions. Unfortunately, as our customer information system does not discern between a payment that was returned due to insufficient funds and payments returned due to stop payment requests or other reasons, on May 5, 2015, a returned payment form letter was generated to advise you that the payment was not honored and that the electric service would be disconnected if not paid. As you are aware, a $5.00 fee was assessed, which has since been deleted.Please know that I have taken steps to ensure the information regarding the final bill of $27,33 has not adversely affected your credit history. Further, in addition to the customer service credit of $50.00 I applied to your account previously, as an additional courtesy, I have issued a credit adjustment in the amount of $27,33; therefore, your account now reflects a zero balance.Attached is a billing and usage summary statement from August 21, 2014 to February 20, 2015 to address the concerns you expressed regarding your higher than expected bills. The usage reflected on the statement is based on actual meter reading data. An increase in usage appears beginning with the November 10, 2014 to December 12, 2014 service period, which is consistent with colder weather conditions. Although Pepco cannot identify what internal conditions or equipment may have contributed to your electrical usage, in the winter the cause of higher usage is typically attributed to appliances that generate heat, such as electric central heating. Additionally, if any appliances are not operating efficiently, they can cause usage to increase.Your questions are understandable regarding actual versus estimated meter readings and the fact that meter readings do not appear on your billing. However, with the installation and activation of smart meters in our service territory, customers no longer see meter readings associated with the billing period on the bill. This is because the meters are read over the air more frequently during the billing cycle rather than once at the end of the billing cycle. Customers are billed by hourly energy intervals on a daily basis and then the daily consumption is added over the entire billing period. Therefore, a total consumption amount for the billing period is now reflected on the invoice rather than beginning and ending meter readings. In cases when a smart meter is no longer communicating, we may estimate usage, which can then be trued up once a meter inspection and manual actual meter reading is obtained. We encourage customers to access their account information using My Account, our online energy management tool where you can view more detailed energy use information.Once your home is rebuilt and all safety inspections have been received, our Customer Engineering Department will work with you and your electrician to have the meter reconnected and the electric account re-established in your name. If I may be of any assistance during that process or if you have any additional questions regarding this information, please call me at the telephone number reflected above.Sincerely,Linda B

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and reluctantly find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. However, I would like to note that although the response did address the major issue in a satisfactory manner, i.e., a test of my meter was performed and the meter was found to be functioning accurately, the business still does not understand the scope of my original complaint. This is in spite of me explaining it to them multiple times when they finally got around to contacting me. The business representative has remained unable to understand and perform the simple arithmetic required to accurately account for my total electricity usage and she has been unable to understand and perform the simple analysis of previous electrical data required to properly and completely address my complaint. My complaint comprised 2 parts: First, I complained about a possibly inaccurate meter based on the aforementioned simple analysis. The meter test performed by the business has resolved that issue. Secondly, I complained about a low quality of customer service. That part of my complaint has not been resolved. I remain appalled by my customer service experience and horrified at the inability of the representative to perform a basic analysis that I consider to be essential for any electrical company. Although I have no choice but to trust that the meter check performed by the company was honest and accurate and concede that portion of my complaint, if given any option, I would not choose to hire Pepco or do business with them ever again, if that was at all possible. 
Regards,
[redacted]

[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]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: the issue has not been completely resolved.  While we appreciate Pepco's efforts to partially resolve our issues, there are still open issues involving safety and billing that need to be resolved.We are still awaiting address resolution on the meter and have not been contacted by anyone from Pepco since the electrical work has been completed and inspected.  It is a safety concern now that there is power in the building, and the address does not match our residence.  The meter location is listed as a non-existent address.  Additionally, the meter is not a commercial meter as currently listed by Pepco.  The meter should be designated as a second residential meter at our address.  Every Pepco representative we spoke to informed us that the $457.00 charge that we were forced to pay to allow for an outage so our electrician could make the external cable safe, was due to the fact that it was a commercial meter, which it is not.
We wish to keep this complaint open/active, and will follow through with filing a claim through Maryland Public Service, as recommended by Pepco in their response dated July 27, 2015.  
Regards,
[redacted]

November 14, 2016Mr. [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant Revdex.com 141 1 K Street, NW, 10" Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404Re: [redacted]Revdex.com H [redacted] Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878Dear Mr. [redacted]:This letter serves to respond to the customer's billing...

concerns. I appreciate the opportunity to provide the following information.Attached is a thirty one month billing history comparison from the customer's occupancy date in 2014 to the current invoice date. The account has been invoiced based on a Maryland Residential rate using actual meter reading data from a smart meter TXA [redacted] installed on October 29, 2013. As the billing history comparison shows, there was an increase in the kilowatt hour consumption on the invoices issued during the months of January 2016 - March 2016, when compared to the same billing period one year prior.Pepco is not in a position to prove or disprove what internal factors may have contributed to the higher than anticipated electric consumption. Primarily, the major energy users in the home such as the heating/air conditioning, electric hot water heater, refrigerator, dryer and lighting all contribute to the overall electric bill. If any of these were not operating efficiently, it could, have caused the usage to increase. In order to help mitigate the rising cost of energy, the customer may be interested in using Pepco's interactive tool; My Account that can help customers analyze their electric bill. The tool enables customers to conduct an energy audit of their home and discover ways to conserve energy and save money. The customer may use this free tool by visiting our website at www.pepco.com.On November 8, 2016, the meter TXA [redacted] was certified as being the correct meter for the customer's home. In addition, the meter was tested and found to be recording with an overall accuracy of 100.0 percent, which is within the guidelines prescribed by the Maryland Public Service Commission.On November 14, 2016, I spoke with Ms. [redacted] and she indicated that she was still concerned about her bills being high. I suggested that she may want to contact the property owner so they can inspect the appliances or heating and cooling equipment. I extended the offer of having a free energy survey performed by a Pepco Energy Specialist, which will help identify other ways to save. A Pepco Energy Specialist will be contacting Ms. [redacted] directly to schedule that appointment. Finally, based on my review the account has been billed accurately. Ms. [redacted] has my direct contact information and can contact me if she has any further questions or concerns.Sincerely,Linda B

[redacted], NW Washington, DC 20068April 28, 2016Mr. [redacted] Trade Practice Consultant 1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404Re: [redacted]Revdex.com Complaint #11383325Dear Mr. [redacted]:This letter is in response to your inquiry on behalf of Ms. [redacted]. I have...

completed my review of Ms. [redacted]’s account and would like to provide the following information.A final/termination notice was sent to the customer in July, August, and September 2015 as a result of late/missing payments on the account. Therefore, a security deposit of $640.00 was requested in September 2015.As stipulated in The General Terms and Conditions for Furnishing Electric Service in Maryland (GTCMD), page 17, section 3 (attached), for residential customers who have not paid a deposit, a deposit may be requested if the Customer fails to pay a bill after a reasonable time has elapsed from the receipt of a termination notice which has arisen because of non-payment of the bill. Furthermore, the Company has the discretion of applying the customer’s payment to the required security deposit.To date, the customer has paid a total of $554.25 of the $640.00 original requested security deposit. However, as a one-time courtesy, we have opted to waive the unpaid portion of $85.75 and refund the paid portion of $554.25 back to the customer’s account. After applying refund to account, the customer currently has a balance of $90.15 due May 9, 2016.It is the Company’s recommendation that the customer make every effort to pay her bills in its entirety by the due date, to prevent any further security deposits from being assessed on the account.Sincerely,Shannah F

See Attachment