Events

Email Alerts

Retail Energy Jobs

 

 

 

About/Contact

Search

Retail Energy Regulator Affirms Individuals Who Are Authorized To Enroll With A Retail Supplier

May 8, 2026

Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com

The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com

Updated, 4:12 pm, 5/8

Spark energy provided the following statement concerning the matter: "We are pleased to see this matter concluded. Our focus remains on providing quality service to customers across the Chicago metropolitan area while maintaining full commitment to all state and federal regulatory standards."

Earlier:

In dismissing a complaint against a retail energy supplier, the Illinois Commerce Commission affirmed that the Illinois Rights of Married Persons Act may be relied upon by retail energy suppliers in determining whether a customer is authorized to enroll an account

The Illinois Rights of Married Persons Act states that the expenses of the family shall be chargeable upon the property of both spouses, or of either of them, in favor of creditors. 750 ILCS 65/15(a)(1).

Additionally, the Act states that no creditor, who has a claim against a spouse or former spouse for an expense incurred by that spouse or former spouse which is not a family expense, shall maintain an action against the other spouse or former spouse for that expense, "except ... for services ordered by the other spouse or former spouse." 750 ILCS 65/15(a)(2)(B).

The ICC further noted that in Section 12 of the Illinois Rights of Married Persons Act, the statute states that, "[a]ll contracts, sales or incumbrances made by one spouse to a marriage ... shall be binding on both ..." 750 ILCS 65/12.

Spark Energy Gas, LLC had enrolled the complainant's account in 2016, with the utility account in the complainant's name, on the authorization of the complainant's husband.

The complainant argued that her husband lacked authorization to enroll with Spark, and, in a complaint filed in 2024, sought a refund of what the complainant alleged were overcharges. The complainant argued that the complainant herself never granted authorization for the switch, never entered into a contract with Spark, and thus the switch was invalid

Spark Energy noted that during the eight years that Spark provided natural gas supply to the complainant, the complainant's husband called Spark Energy three times in response to automatic contract renewal notices and agreed to revised contract terms. During those telephone conversations, the complainant's husband was specifically asked if he had authority to make changes to the account and the complainant's husband had stated that he did.

As summarized by the ICC, "Complainant states that her husband does not have authority to enroll her account for gas service with Spark Energy. However, Complainant admitted during the February 19, 2025 hearing in this proceeding that she enrolled in an account for gas service with Nicor in her husband’s name."

The ICC found that, "Spark Energy rightfully relied on this statute [the Illinois Rights of Married Persons Act] in entering into a contract with [complainant's husband] and enrolling [complainant] in Spark Energy gas service."

The ICC further found that, contrary to assertions from the complainant, the complainant was aware that the complainant was being served by an AGS and not utility supply, citing several recorded interactions and disclosures, subsequent to the enrollment, between Spark and the complainant

The ICC said, "Complainant’s spouse ... entered into agreements with Spark Energy to provide natural gas supply; of which Complainant benefitted from for eight years until she determined that she did not agree with the costs; and now she objects to the agreements her husband entered into with Spark Energy. The Commission finds that the Complainant, her spouse, and the household benefitted from the natural gas supply provided by Spark Energy for eight years and notes the monthly bills were paid by both Complainant and her husband."

"[T]he Commission finds that Complainant was a customer of Spark Energy, Complainant had knowledge that Spark Energy was her natural gas supplier when she called to make a monthly payment. Additionally, Complainant did not provide any evidence that Spark Energy billed Complainant incorrectly or that she was overcharged. The Commission finds that this Complaint is therefore denied."

Docket 24-0723

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
NEW -- Director of Broker Relations -- Retail Supplier
NEW -- Channel Partner Manager -- Retail Energy
Manager of Sales, Commercial -- Retail Supplier
Commercial Sales Support Specialist -- Retail Supplier
Refreshed 2/24/26 -- Manager, ISO Coordination (electricity), Retail Supplier

Email This Story

HOME

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

 

Events

Email Alerts

Retail Energy Jobs

 

 

 

About/Contact

Search