PUC Affirms Precedent Concerning Authority To Enforce General Consumer Protection Laws

The Pennsylvania PUC, in an interlocutory order on a complaint against a retail supplier, has affirmed that it lacks authority to review whether a violation of Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (CPL) and Telemarketer Registration Act (TRA) has occurred.

In a complaint against Respond Power, the Attorney General and Office of Consumer Advocate had asked the PUC to rule on the following question:

Does the Commission have authority and jurisdiction to determine whether a violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (CPL) and Telemarketer Registration Act (TRA) has occurred when considering whether the Commission's regulations – which require compliance with these laws – have been violated?

The PUC had previously addressed this same question in November, and affirmed its prior decision by answering this question in the negative.

"Although we answer the material question in the negative and reject the exercise of direct Commission jurisdiction and authority pursuant to the CPL and the TRA, we agree with the conclusion of the presiding ALJs that the Commission has jurisdiction over alleged violations of our own Regulations, which jurisdiction includes determining whether the Commission's Regulations prohibiting deceptive and/or misleading conduct and/or the Commission's telemarketing regulations have been violated by an EGS," the PUC said.

"We conclude that the Commission can hear claims alleging fraudulent, deceptive, and/or misleading conduct brought against Respond under the Commission's Regulations and that the Commission can hear claims alleging improper verification of enrollment of residential customers, improper association of Respond with the EDC, and other allegations raised against the Company under the Commission's telemarketing regulations," the PUC said.

The AG and OCA also asked the PUC to address the following question:

Does the Commission have the authority and jurisdiction to determine whether the prices charged to customers by an electric generation supplier (EGS) conform to the EGS disclosure statement regarding pricing?

The PUC answered this question in the affirmative, also affirming prior precedent.

Docket C-2014-2427659