|
|
|
|
|
Texas PUC ALJs Are Newly Informing Formal Complainants Against REPs Of Ability To Refer Matter To PUC's Enforcement Division, Rather Than Proceeding With The Complainant Prosecuting The Matter
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Texas PUC ALJs have recently begun informing complainants filing formal complaints at the Texas PUC, including complaints against retail electric providers, of the option to request that the alleged behavior be investigated by the PUC's Division of Compliance and
Enforcement (DICE), rather than the complainant litigating the formal complaint, though the complainant would not be a party in any DICE proceeding
Such formal notice of options to the complainant, in a procedural order, is a new approach from the PUCT.
Although the notices themselves do not address the reason for newly providing such notice of options to the complainant, recent PUC precedent concerning the relief available to complainants has, as previously reported, led to many more complaints against REPs (and other entities) surviving motions to dismiss for lack of available relief.
As more fully discussed in ECM's prior stories, the PUC has affirmed that a finding from the PUC that a violation occurred is a form of relief available to complainants. This has allowed complaints to continue even after, for example, restitution having been made to the customer and no monetary relief to the complainant remaining available from the PUC, as the PUC lacks authority to award damages, attorney's fees, etc.
Regardless of the reason that the PUC has begun informing complainants of a DICE option, the new notices may serve to direct complaints which seek to stop certain behavior in the market, and for which no individual relief (i.e. damages) is available from the PUC, to DICE, rather than proceeding with a potentially inefficient pro se complaint process. While DICE, of course, has always had the ability and discretion to rely on complaints to inform its areas of focus and to determine whether greater investigation is warranted, the new notice allows the complainant to specifically request such further investigation by DICE (which is separate from the informal review conducted by the PUC's Consumer Protection Division prior to a formal complaint being filed).
The new options notice from a presiding ALJ has been used in several recently filed non-REP complaints, but has now been used in a complaint filed against a retail electric provider -- specifically, the complaint filed against Tesla Energy Ventures, LLC concerning Tesla's VPP, which had been first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com on March 20
The complaint against Tesla Energy Ventures is illustrative of the complaint inefficiencies which the options notice may serve to solve by notifying customers of a DICE option. In the complaint against Tesla Energy Ventures, the complainant, in their stated request for relief, does not seek a refund or other compensation, but rather that the PUC require Tesla Energy Ventures to change its marketing materials to address what the complainant alleges are violations of PUC rule (see details here)
Specifically, the ALJ presiding over the complaint against Tesla Energy Ventures informed the complainant of two methods by which the PUC may evaluate the concerns raised by the complainant -- the complainant may prosecute their formal complaint (including on a pro se basis), or the complainant may, "request the Commission’s Division of Compliance and
Enforcement (DICE) to investigate and take appropriate action".
Under the DICE option, the complainant, "turns over responsibility for investigating his complaint to DICE."
DICE may, "take
appropriate action," after an investigation, the ALJ said
In addition to potentially seeking administrative penalties, DICE after an investigation may request that the PUC, "require corrective action," the ALJ said
The ALJ was not explicit as to whether such "corrective action" sought by DICE could potentially include, specifically to the complainant, restitution (unique from damages)
The ALJ notified the complainant that, under the DICE option, the complainant is not a party to the
DICE investigation nor any enforcement action that might result from the DICE investigation.
If the complainant chooses to prosecute the complaint themselves (rather than referring the complaint to DICE), the ALJ specifically informed the complainant that the complainant bears the burden of producing evidence sufficient to prove that Tesla Energy Ventures undertook the alleged actions, and that the alleged actions violated a tariff, law, rule, or order that the
Commission has jurisdiction to enforce.
The ALJ informed the complainant that the PUC does not have authority to award attorney’s fees, court costs, or damages under
contract law.
Docket 59543
ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
March 23, 2026
Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW -- Manager of Sales, Commercial -- Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Commercial Sales Support Specialist -- Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Channel Partner Manager - TX -- Retail Supplier
• NEW / Refreshed 2/24/26 -- Manager, ISO Coordination (electricity), Retail Supplier
• Refreshed 2/2/26 -- Account Executive (Commercial Retail Energy)
|
|
|
|
|