Energy Choice
                            

Matters

Retail Supplier Alleges Utility Makes, "Sweeping And Deceptive Assertion," Concerning Complaints, Says Utility Improperly Denying Customer List Access Over 14 Complaints Which Have Been Addressed Or Are "Meritless"

November 17, 2015

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-15 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com

Energy 95, LLC d/b/a Quake Energy, LLC responded to a Notice of Material Default issued to the supplier by Dominion East Ohio (DEO), saying that the allegations as described in the notice have been inflated and in one case amounted to a, "sweeping and deceptive assertion," and that Dominion East Ohio is improperly denying Quake access to DEO's eligible customer list.

As previously reported (click here for details), DEO alleged in the notice, "conduct and communications that could be considered unfair, misleading, deceptive, or unconscionable," citing among other things alleged coaching on TPVs, alleged statements by sales agents that the customer was not agreeing to a contract under the TPV process, and allegations that agents made, "references to the State of Ohio or the Energy Choice program, followed closely by statements suggesting that the call or enrollment was required."

While DEO ambiguously said in its notice that it had received a "number" of complaints, Quake replied that in approximately the last year, DEO has requested information from Quake regarding "approximately fourteen" customer complaints related to sales calls made by Quake's third-party telephone sales service provider.

Moreover, Quake said that, "It is not disputed that [the] overwhelming majority of the complaints received by Quake through DEO have already been successfully addressed or are meritless."

Quake noted that the 14 complaints occurred over a roughly three-year period.

Regarding DEO allegations of poor record retention by Quake, Quake said, "Quake was unable to identify any evidence that a sales call had taken place in four (4) instances. With the exception of one unavailable sales call, all other call records, both sales calls and Independent Third-Party Verification ('TPV') calls requested by DEO were promptly produced to DEO. Of those ten (10) remaining complaints, two (2) customers indicated in the recordings that they were currently under energy sales contracts, and those calls were terminated quickly by the sales representative in a seemingly amicable manner. The customers were not switched, and no apparent violation of any rule or procedure was noted. Of the remaining eight (8) calls, Quake agrees that three (3) complaints were problematic."

Regarding alleged Do Not Call violations, Quake said, "In one instance, Quake's telephone solicitation vendor failed to monthly update its 'Do Not Call' registry, which resulted in a customer being contacted incorrectly. That customer contacted Quake directly, received an apology, and was promptly added to Quake's internal 'Do Not Call' registry, so that the error would not be repeated. Upon investigation, Quake determined that the telephone sales vendor had failed to update its monthly 'Do Not Call' registry, resulting in the incorrect call being placed to the complaining prospective customer ... In this instance, the third-party provider was warned that any future failures to update its do not call registry would not be tolerated, and to date Quake is unaware of any repetition of this unacceptable behavior."

"This is the sole complaint relating to DEO's sweeping and deceptive assertion that DEO has received 'numerous complaints' from 'many' customers that informed DEO that they had enrolled in one or more 'Do Not Call' registries. While 'one' is undoubtedly a number, and the word 'many' is somewhat subjective, common parlance and a general understanding of the English language suggest that an isolated incident, which was addressed as quickly and completely as possible by Quake, does not constitute 'numerous' complaints by 'many' customers," Quake said

"There remain two (2) customer complaint situations, over a span of over three (3) years in which Quake agrees that there were problems, and those problems were quickly and completely addressed by Quake. In these two (2) instances the sales representative, and therefore the third party vendor, did not follow Quake's expressed requirements and standards for telephone sales solicitations. DEO refers to these two (2) customers complaints several times in its supporting papers, and apparently separates the sales and TPV calls misleadingly suggesting that the issues involved more than two (2) customer complaints. The sales representative, in both situations ... is no longer authorized to act on Quake's behalf. The representative did in fact fail to follow the prescribed script and was not clear that she represented Quake, although the recorded TPV verification was clear that Quake is a supplier and not the utility. The third party verification procedure did clearly identify that the procedure was to switch gas supply to Quake. In both instances the sales representative did appear to forge ahead with a switch in service despite apparent confusion on the part of the prospective customer's representative. Quake agrees that these two (2) prospective customers were treated incorrectly, and as noted, the sales representative is no longer authorized to act on Quake's behalf," Quake said

"DEO's assertions that Quake could not provide records pertaining to six of the complaints is wrong. Quake has no record of the third party provider making calls to four of the fourteen customer complaints. As far as Quake is able to determine, those customers were simply not contacted by a representative acting on behalf of Quake,' Quake said

"Quake representatives did not suggest that they were acting on behalf of DEO or the State of Ohio. All customers contacted by Quake representatives were part of the Energy Choice program, so that statement is factually correct. In some instances, telephone sales representatives have not identified themselves as representatives of Quake as quickly or clearly as Quake would have preferred. However, on no occasion related to these 14 complaints did sales representatives identify themselves as acting on behalf of DEO or the state of Ohio. Quake agrees and has addressed the conduct of representatives who indicate they are calling potential customers 'as a courtesy.' Quake agrees that such a statement is inaccurate and inappropriate," Quake said

"The violation of third party verification protocols is noted and shall be addressed by Quake. However, these violations appeared to be relatively minor technical problems. No prospective customer was 'coached' to say 'yes' when that customer desired to indicate a negative response," Quake said

Quake said that it is agreeable to participating in a collaborative with DEO and PUCO Staff to address the issues, which was the initial relief sought by DEO.

Quake noted, however, that, "DEO fails to note in its supporting papers that most if not all of the complaints were forwarded and pursued by Quake's competitors, not the customers themselves.

As a result, Quake said that during the collaborative, "DEO should be required to prove to the commission that DEO has acted fairly and in a nondiscriminatory manner when compared to DEO's treatment of customer complaints connected to other competing certified retail natural gas suppliers."

"Quake should not be singled out for disparate treatment simply because it is a relatively new and relatively small supplier in Ohio," Quake said

Quake also alleged that DEO has been withholding customer lists from the company since April 2015, contrary to the administrative code. While DEO has since applied for a waiver of providing such lists to Quake given the alleged complaints, Quake said that such waiver, even if granted, cannot cure DEO's past refusal and alleged non-compliance with the code.

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Supplier Services Manager
• NEW! -- Customer Account Manager -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Staff Accountant, Commissions Analysis -- Retail Supplier -- Houston
• NEW! -- Direct Business Development Manager -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Compliance Manager -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Operations Analyst -- Retail Supplier -- Houston
• NEW! -- ERCOT Business Development Manager -- Retail Supplier -- Houston
• NEW! -- Channel Manager -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Marketing/Channel Manager -- Retail Supplier -- Houston
• NEW! -- Supplier Services Account Executive
• NEW! -- Manager, Operations -- Retail Supplier -- Houston
• NEW! -- Settlements Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Data Administrator -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Energy Services Program Director - $230K