AG: State Should Review Supplier Licenses If Complaint Metrics Exceeded (Cites "Sharp" Increase in Complaints)

The Massachusetts DPU should set complaint metrics for retail electric suppliers under which exceeding a certain level of complaints would automatically trigger a DPU review of the supplier's license, the Massachusetts Attorney General said in comments to the DPU

The AG was commenting on door-to-door marketing provisions proposed by the DPU, which, among other things, require weekly complaint reports to be filed with the DPU (click here for details).

The AG proposed that such complaint reports be extended to telemarketing as well as door-to-door marketing.

Furthermore, the AG requested that the DPU adopt standards for the complaint data that, if not met, would trigger a Department review of a competitive supplier’s license under G.L. c. 30A.

"The reporting of the Complaint Data, as proposed by the Department, is a great first step to monitoring competitive suppliers whose agents violate the requirements of G.L. c. 164 and 220 C.M.R. 11.00. However, unless offending competitive suppliers are subject to consequences for the poor conduct of their agents, simply monitoring complaints will not effectively motivate compliance. Accordingly, the Attorney General’s Office recommends that the Department initiate further process, including discovery, transcribed technical sessions, and input from all stakeholders, to develop and adopt standards concerning the level of complaints that would trigger a review of a competitive supplier’s license for suspension, revocation, or non-renewal," the AG said

"The time is right for the development of such standards. The Attorney General’s Office has noticed a sharp increase in the number of complaints that it has received regarding the conduct of certain competitive suppliers relative to marketing electricity supply to residential customers, and thus the initiation of proceedings under 220 CMR 11.05(2)(e) may be appropriate," the AG said

"Having clear standards would result in greater fairness for competitive suppliers. At present, it is unclear what level of complaints would trigger Department review of a competitive supplier’s license. Without clear standards, competitive suppliers are subject to proceedings that affect their license ad hoc. Nor would standards for the Complaint Data unfairly subject competitive suppliers to penalties for unmeritorious complaints from consumers. Under the Attorney General’s Office’s proposal, the violation of the standards would not necessarily dictate that a particular sanction, or any sanction at all, be imposed on a competitive supplier. Rather, the violation of the standards would simply trigger a review under G.L. c. 30A of the supplier’s marketing activity. If the G.L. c. 30A proceeding revealed that the supplier was acting appropriately but had simply incurred a number of unjustified complaints, then the Department would not suspend, revoke, or refuse to renew the supplier’s license," the AG said.

The AG stressed that the DPU would not be limited to reviewing a supplier's continued licensure only under the complaint metrics, and said that the DPU could initiate a review as needed if other circumstances warrant

The AG also said that the complaint data should be made public

Docket 14-140