|
|
|
|
|
Choice State Governor, AG Announce "Crack Down" On Junk Fees, With Direction To All State Agencies (Including Retail Energy Regulator)
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill and Attorney General Jennifer Davenport announced a coordinated "crack down" on junk fees, with direction to all executive state agencies (including the Board of Public Utilities) to identify and analyze the impact of junk fees on consumers, and to report recommendations on legislative and regulatory measures to reduce or eliminate junk fees.
The AG also highlighted enforcement measures which may be taken under the state's existing Consumer Fraud Act, including actions against "excessively high fees" which may be unconscionable.
Although retail energy contracts are not specifically cited among the examples of products with junk fees, several of the examples cited by the governor and AG could apply to certain retail energy contracts, such as the inclusion of "bait and switch" fees as within the targeted junk fees
An executive order from the governor describes junk fees as, among other things, including fees, "designed to generate revenue while providing little or
no benefit to the consumer", including
termination fees
The executive order more specifically defines "Junk Fees" as, "hidden, surprise, or
excessively overpriced fees, including those
associated with a good or service that provides little
or no benefit to the consumer."
Executive branch state agencies shall report by September 14, 2026 an assessment of junk fees and recommendations to address such fees and, "to ensure that 'all in' pricing
and transparent fee disclosure is standard across
State programs and programs regulated".
The AG said in an enforcement statement that, "Despite the prevalence of ... practices [concerning junk fees], consumers often feel they have little recourse to challenge junk fees. When consumers purchase goods or services in the marketplace, they are frequently bound by contract provisions that mandate that their disputes be resolved through arbitration in a private, non-appealable forum. Those arbitration provisions, which themselves are often buried in fine print, also almost universally prohibit consumers from banding together in a class to address a widespread problem through litigation in a consolidated fashion. That makes it even more important for the Attorney General to confront the issue."
The AG also said that the state's existing Consumer Fraud Act (CFA), which prohibits deceptive and similar practices, may be used to take actions against companies engaged in various junk fee practices
The AG said, "Under the CFA, deceptive conduct includes affirmative misrepresentations about material information10 that have the 'capacity to mislead.' The CFA does not require proof of an intent to mislead or knowledge of the falsity. Under those principles, 'drip pricing' -- the practice of hiding mandatory fees by luring the consumer in with a low advertised price and then tacking on fees later or at the end of the purchasing process—may be a deceptive practice that violates the CFA."
The AG highlighted past actions against "bait and switch" pricing as applicable to junk fees
"The CFA also prohibits knowing omissions of material information, such as knowingly failing to disclose the existence of a fee or the qualities of a fee that would be material to the consumer’s decision to accept the fee or make a purchase," the AG said
The AG also said that, "Excessively high fees also may be unconscionable."
"In determining whether a fee is unconscionable, courts consider, among other things, the seller’s cost and the corresponding value of the good or service to the consumer," the AG said
"As the New Jersey Supreme Court has explained, relevant factors in evaluating unconscionability under the CFA include whether the good or service is offered 'at an exorbitant price' and the practical utility of the good or service 'for the represented purpose,'" the AG said
"Based on those factors, it may be unconscionable to impose a significant price markup on a fee for a good or service that provides little or no value to the consumer," the AG said
"[F]ees for products or services that provide little or no value to the consumer may be 'junk fees' in the truest sense of the phrase," the AG said
The AG also said that, "employing high-pressure sales tactics that effectively force consumers into providing their consent," may also be unconscionable or abusive, and said that, "[w]hether consumers have an opportunity to provide meaningful and informed consent for certain fees may be affected by practices".
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
Junk Fees Include "Excessively Overpriced Fees" That Provide Little Benefit To Customers
June 16, 2026
Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• Refreshed 5/27/26 -- Manager, ISO Coordination (electricity), Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Channel Partner Manager -- Retail Energy
|
|
|
|
|