Energy Choice
                            

Matters

Current Utilities Vehemently Opposes NOV, Alleges Texas PUC Staff Ignoring Definition of Aggregator

February 18, 2016

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-16 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com

Current Utilities vehemently denied the allegations contained in a Notice of Violation (NOV) issued by the executive director of the Public Utility Commission of Texas, and alleged that PUC Enforcement Staff is ignoring the definition of aggregator which references the joining of customer load, an activity Current Utilities says it does not engage in.

As previously reported, the Notice of Violation alleges that Current Utilities is acting as an aggregator without a certificate (click here to see specific allegations)

In an email to PUCT Enforcement Staff prior to the formal issuance of the NOV, which has now been filed by the PUCT in Docket 45621, Current Utilities maintained that it is not an aggregator.

Per the substantive rules, "An entity is an aggregator, as opposed to a consultant, if it conducts any activity that joins two or more customers into a purchasing unit to negotiate the purchase of electricity from retail electric providers (REPs). If an entity conducts activities only in the capacity of advisor to a customer or set of customers, without contact with REPs specific to that customer or customer group, then it is a consultant that does not need to register pursuant to this section."

The rules further define a Class I aggregator as, "a person joining two or more customers, other than municipalities and political subdivision corporations, into a single purchasing unit to negotiate the purchase of electricity from REPs."

Current Utilities stressed the definition's provision that an aggregator, "joins two or more customers into a purchasing unit," stating, "We have NEVER combined customers into a 'single purchasing unit' and thus do not fit the definition of an aggregator, " Current Utilities said in the email

"Our customers are 'INDIVIDUAL PURCHASING Persons' and as such are not 'UNITS' at all, but merely individuals. As such we represent individuals and do not, and have never attempted to combine them into a SINGLE 'UNIT'. They are individuals and not UNITED in ANY fashion whatsoever," Current Utilities said in the email

PUCT Enforcement Staff did allege in a report accompanying the NOV that Current Utilities, "joins customers together in a pool."

"We are demanding that the PUC tells us just exactly HOW we are operating in a fashion that 'joins customers together as a SINGLE purchasing [u]nit' when all our customers receive separate and distinct bills and we negotiate INDIVIDUALLY for each customer we obtain with each REP contract in a manner no different than ANY other broker operating in the State of Texas," Current Utilities said in the email

Current Utilities also alleged that the PUCT has refused to allow Current Utilities, through its power of attorney with customers, to file complaints against retail electric providers over the imposition of early termination fees, and alleged that its "trouble" with the PUC stems from such issues

"Current Utilities VEHEMOUSLY [sic] disputes that we are an aggregator but VEHEMENTLY claims that we are a both a broker and a legal representative of our customers and that the PUC has acted irresponsibly and to the detriment of both our customers and our company by refusing to recognize our Legal POA by refusing to allow us to file complaints on our customer's behalf," Current Utilities said in the email

Current Utilities provided the following statement to EnergyChoiceMatters.com:

"We would challenge the PUC to tell us how exactly we are different than any other broker other than having a Power of Attorney from some of our customers who trust us to make the best decisions for them and would rather not be bothered with doing it themselves.

"Many of our clients came to Tremcor Energy in 2003 and then followed me to Current Utilities when Tremcor closed. They just prefer to have someone looking after their electric needs and chose us.

"Our agreements with REPs are virtually identical to the agreements that any broker has with any REP. I would further challenge the PUC to find a single customer of ours who believes that they are in a buying pool and joined into a 'single purchasing unit' or find any REP who believes that our agreement with them is in any substantial way different from any agreement that they have with any other broker.

"However, we certainly do not combine our customers into a single purchasing unit. Each customer agrees to join at the rate that is prevailing with the REP at the time that we sign them up. No different than any other broker.

"The issue is the POA [Power of Attorney] and as such, the PUC is trying to push a square peg into a round hole on this issue."

Roy Anderson, CEO of Current Utilities, Inc., further alleged in a statement to EnergyChoiceMatters.com that, "Our trouble with the PUC started when we began complaining that Tara was charging illegal early termination fees to our customers when we moved them from Tara. We have given the PUC ample evidence to support the fact that the customers that Tara charged these early termination fees to were not legally contracted to Tara, but the PUC refused our evidence, did not acknowledge receipt of it and refused to answer any complaint that we filed with the PUC as the Power of Attorney on behalf of our customers. Instead, they started telling us that we were an aggregator and not properly licensed and threatening to fine us."

In response to the allegations made against Just Energy and affiliate Tara Energy, Just Energy provided the following statement to EnergyChoiceMatters.com:

"This issue is between the PUC and Current Utilities. Neither Tara Energy nor Just Energy has any role in the proceedings that the PUC has against Current. Tara Energy only became aware of the issue once the PUC filed a Notice of Violation against Current for their tactics and behavior. While we do not take an official position on the matters under review in this docket at this time, Mr. Anderson has made false and damaging assertions against Tara Energy and its parent Just Energy in his email. Any allegations by Current Utilities against Tara Energy and Just Energy are patently false. Tara Energy and Just Energy are long standing, responsible participants in the Texas retail energy market who value each and every customer, and we sympathize with customers who have experienced adverse impacts due to the actions of Current Utilities." -- Just Energy

Docket 45621

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Field Sales Director, $200,000+
• NEW! -- Product Development Associate - Marketing -- Retail Provider -- DFW
• NEW! -- Agent & Affinity Partner Sales Manager -- Retail Provider
• NEW! -- Channel Marketing Manager -- Retail Provider -- Houston
• NEW! -- Operations Manager -- Retail Supplier