josco energy lawsuitjosco energy lawsuit

Similarly, the required complaint data was not included with the application package documents. The complaint data provided included the types of complaints for Maryland and only the number of complaints for Ohio, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia." "Josco repeatedly claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures. Cases 15-M-0127, et al. The PSC stated in its order that, "Turning to the marketing provisions of the UBP, SunSea violated the UBP by failing to remove customers from its marketing database after the customers asked to no longer be called by SunSea. Similarly, the required complaint data was not included with the application package documents. -- Senior Analyst - Pricing & Structuring -- Retail Supplier -- Houston The PSC stated in its order that, "SunSea also remarked that it strives 'to achieve the highest standards of customer satisfaction, and takes its compliance obligations, its relationship with regulatory authorities, and the handling of consumer inquiries and complaints very seriously.' NEW! This includes 12 that were confirmed to be checks dated February 2021 for refunds that had been promised on various dates ranging from February 19, 2020, through October 19, 2020. The list of all trade names used in other states, as required in Section 1.E., was marked 'N/A.' Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. This includes 12 that were confirmed to be checks dated February 2021 for refunds that had been promised on various dates ranging from February 19, 2020, through October 19, 2020. NEW! The PSC's show cause order states, "On November 17, 2020, SunSea filed an application, signed by their CEO, seeking to comply with the December 2019 Order. These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates. The final page of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent." The information provided by Josco in these sections suggests that Josco has no affiliates or other trade names and operates only in New York." NEW! Smart One answered 'no' in response to Section 1.C., which asks if, during the previous 36 months, any criminal or regulatory sanctions have been imposed against any senior officer of the ESCO applicant or any entity holding ownership interests of 10% or more in the ESCO. The PSC's show cause order states, "Josco filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021. The PSC said that it found Sunsea's response to the 2020 show cause order "unconvincing" and stated in its new order that, " The Commission finds that SunSea has violated the consumer protection provisions of the UBP and moreover has not adequately remedied these violations in response to consumer complaints, Staffs investigation, nor the Commissions OTSC [order to show cause]. The PSC's show cause order states, "The fact that Josco has affiliates operating in multiple states appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.B. Similarly, the required complaint data was not included with the application package documents. NEW! This appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C. The PSC stated in its order that, "SunSea states that in response to the NOAF, SunSea denied the allegations against it and provided enrollment documentation. That, combined with the consistent complaints about misleading sales tactics and promises of rebates, rewards, and/or discounts, is not indicative of high standards of customer service." -- Energy Operations Analyst Associate -- Retail Supplier -- DFW NEW! NEW! The PSC stated in its order that, "The Commission further finds that SunSeas response to the OTSC did not remedy the numerous violations alleged. Additionally, Staff notes that on October 7, 2020, the Maryland Public Service Commission issued an order to impose consequences against SunSea for violations of numerous provisions of the Public Utility Article and the Code of Maryland Regulations. NEW! NEW! The PSC's show cause order states, "On February 4, 2021, Staff identified apparent false and misleading statements in the application and sought additional information from Josco. Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. Smart One It stated that 'the company only operates in New York State and the companys complaint data is on file with [Staff].'" The information provided in the RAAF, if proven to be incorrect, would constitute a violation of the UBP." Gas-to-bitcoin flare mitigation company Crusoe Energy filed a lawsuit against the company Alkane Midstream on August 22, 2022. Based on SunSeas history of QRS/SRS responses and its NOAF response, including prior denials of refunds, we find these new refunds to be an attempt at self-preservation because the OTSC required it, rather than a gesture of good faith." Starions response to Section 1.B. NEW! These facts appears [sic] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C. This is also not indicative of a company that has been taking its relationship with regulatory authorities seriously since the allegations included questionable marketing practices and misrepresentation, not just disputed enrollments." The lack of adequate responses to the QRS/SRS complaints from July 2019-November 2020 directly contradicts the statement regarding SunSeas handling of consumer inquiries and complaints. Cases 15-M-0127, et al. NEW! Additionally, Staff notes that on October 7, 2020, the Maryland Public Service Commission issued an order to impose consequences against SunSea for violations of numerous provisions of the Public Utility Article and the Code of Maryland Regulations. The final page of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent." NEW! The complaint data provided included the types of complaints for Maryland and only the number of complaints for Ohio, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia." Josco was ordered to return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the PSC's revocation order Smart One answered 'no' in response to Section 1.C., which asks if, during the previous 36 months, any criminal or regulatory sanctions have been imposed against any senior officer of the ESCO applicant or any entity holding ownership interests of 10% or more in the ESCO. "Josco repeatedly claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures. SunSea stated in its response that it is 'committed to making whole all customers which were identified in Appendix A and B to the OTSC as well as additional customers as a gesture of good faith.' -- Sr. Analyst, Structuring -- Retail Supplier of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." Similarly, the required complaint data was not included with the application package documents. .' These facts appears [sic] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C. Starion provided the following statement concerning the matter: State Agencies; Online Services . The PSC stated in its order that, "SunSea states that in response to the NOAF, SunSea denied the allegations against it and provided enrollment documentation. The complaint data provided included the types of complaints for Maryland and only the number of complaints for Ohio, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia." NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: The PSC stated in its order that, "Josco further claims that it has 'consistently worked and continues to work cooperatively and proactively with Staff to quickly and fairly address customer issues and complaints.' On August 2, 2019, the Maryland Public Service Commission issued its Order Suspending Retail Supply License, Imposing Civil Penalty, and Directing the Transfer of Service against Smart One. Consequences against SunSea are appropriate as it has 'a material pattern of consumer complaints on matters within the ESCOs control,' failed to comply with 'federal, state, or local laws, rules, or regulations related to sales or marketing,' and has failed to comply with the marketing standards of UBP 10.5 The Commission finds that 116 complaints regarding SunSeas marketing practices over a 16 month period represents a material pattern of complaints on matters within SunSeas control. -- Sales Development Representative (SDR) -- Houston On November 21, 2019, the Commonwealth of Virginia State Corporation Commission issued a Rule to Show Cause against Smart One Energy for violations of the Rules Governing Retail Access to Competitive Energy Services. The script lists choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. -- Energy Advisor The PSC's show cause order states, "On November 18, 2020, Josco filed an application, signed by the Vice President of Operations, seeking to comply with the December 2019 Order. This is also not indicative of a company that has been taking its relationship with regulatory authorities seriously since the allegations included questionable marketing practices and misrepresentation, not just disputed enrollments." Because SunSea has had a significant history of slamming, misrepresentation, and other enrollment related complaints, and was subject of recent enforcement action in New York, the review of complaints from other states was a predominant concern in the application review process. With respect to the revocation of Sunsea's current eligibility, see our prior story for background on the alleged violations and a prior December 2020 show cause order Cases 15-M-0127, et al. SunSea Cases 15-M-0127, et al. Section 1.D., which lists all states in which the company has operated during the last 24 months, refers to another attachment that states Starion serves customers in New York and Ohio, and is licensed in Michigan and Indiana. "[T]he Commission finds Josco to have engaged in misleading and/or deceptive marketing tactics, including promising savings/discounts that did not materialize, posing as a utility employee, and marketing in English to consumers with limited English proficiency. Section 1.D., which lists all states in which the company has operated during the last 24 months, refers to another attachment that states Starion serves customers in New York and Ohio, and is licensed in Michigan and Indiana. "For these reasons, Josco, Smart One, Starion, and SunSea are each ordered to show cause why their applications for eligibility to operate as an ESCO in New York State should not be denied," the PSC said Because SunSea has had a significant history of slamming, misrepresentation, and other enrollment related complaints, and was subject of recent enforcement action in New York, the review of complaints from other states was a predominant concern in the application review process. -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst The PSC stated in its order that, "SunSea states that 'this unfortunate circumstance is not due to willful noncompliance, but rather the rogue actions of marketing vendors. In Section 1.E., Starion notes the other trade name used in other states is 'Starion Energy NY, Inc.' The information provided by Starion in these sections indicates that Starion has two affiliates, operates only in New York and Ohio, uses only the trade name 'Starion Energy NY, Inc.' in other states, and that no senior officer of the ESCO applicant or entity holding ownership interests of 10% or more in the ESCO has had any criminal or regulatory sanctions imposed within the last 36 months. This appears to indicate that SunSea has failed to abide by marketing regulations in other states, in addition to the marketing concerns in New York. Cases 15-M-0127, et al. The significant number of complaints filed against Josco between 2016 and 2020 alleging marking violations demonstrate a material pattern of complaints on matters within Joscos control." NEW! SunSea NEW! NEW! The PSC said that it found Sunsea's response to the 2020 show cause order "unconvincing" and stated in its new order that, " The Commission finds that SunSea has violated the consumer protection provisions of the UBP and moreover has not adequately remedied these violations in response to consumer complaints, Staffs investigation, nor the Commissions OTSC [order to show cause]. ESCOs wishing to continue to serve customers after the PSC's retail market reset order were required to file new applications for continued ESCO eligibility SunSea Starions response to Section 1.B. of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, refers to an Attachment that now lists Joscos affiliates as Josco Energy MA, LLC, Josco Energy IL, LLC, and Josco Energy USA, LLC. of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked 'N/A.' The PSC said that Josco's response to the 2020 show cause order was "unconvincing" and said, "The Commission finds that Josco has violated the consumer protection provisions of the UBP and moreover has not adequately remedied these violations in response to consumer complaints, Staffs investigation, nor the Commissions OTSC [Order to Show Cause]. Smart One answered 'no' in response to Section 1.C., which asks if, during the previous 36 months, any criminal or regulatory sanctions have been imposed against any senior officer of the ESCO applicant or any entity holding ownership interests of 10% or more in the ESCO. NEW! The PSC stated in its order that, "Turning to the marketing provisions of the UBP, SunSea violated the UBP by failing to remove customers from its marketing database after the customers asked to no longer be called by SunSea. Additionally, the Commission finds that SunSea engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in marketing to New York customers, including making false or misleading representations regarding the rates or savings offered by SunSea." NEW! This appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C. email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication -- Account Operations Manager -- Retail Supplier Section 1.D., which lists all states in which Josco has operated during the last 24 months, includes only New York. That's what private electricity company Vistra seems to be alleging in litigation against Koch, one of its gas suppliers. The PSC stated in its order that, "SunSea also remarked that it strives 'to achieve the highest standards of customer satisfaction, and takes its compliance obligations, its relationship with regulatory authorities, and the handling of consumer inquiries and complaints very seriously.' Consequences against SunSea are appropriate as it has 'a material pattern of consumer complaints on matters within the ESCOs control,' failed to comply with 'federal, state, or local laws, rules, or regulations related to sales or marketing,' and has failed to comply with the marketing standards of UBP 10.5 The Commission finds that 116 complaints regarding SunSeas marketing practices over a 16 month period represents a material pattern of complaints on matters within SunSeas control. Additionally, Staff notes that on October 7, 2020, the Maryland Public Service Commission issued an order to impose consequences against SunSea for violations of numerous provisions of the Public Utility Article and the Code of Maryland Regulations. and 1.D. SunSea stated in its response that it is 'committed to making whole all customers which were identified in Appendix A and B to the OTSC as well as additional customers as a gesture of good faith.' The PSC stated in its order that, "Josco further claims that it has 'consistently worked and continues to work cooperatively and proactively with Staff to quickly and fairly address customer issues and complaints.' NEW! NEW! and 1.E. . Moreover, the corrective action eventually taken to terminate a marketing vendor did not address these complaints which originated with an entirely different vendor." -- Retail Supplier The required complaint data was also missing from the application package." Section 1.D., which lists all states in which the company has operated during the last 24 months, included only New York. SunSea stated in its response that it is 'committed to making whole all customers which were identified in Appendix A and B to the OTSC as well as additional customers as a gesture of good faith.' Associate -- Retail Supplier -- DFW The PSC stated in its order that, "Josco refers to its 'demonstrated commitment to compliance and customer service' with regard to its complaints in New York. NEW! This is also not indicative of a company that has been taking its relationship with regulatory authorities seriously since the allegations included questionable marketing practices and misrepresentation, not just disputed enrollments." List of Energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A.,... In which josco energy lawsuit company Alkane Midstream on August 22, 2022 in Illinois Maryland. In its marketing and complaint handling procedures Josco repeatedly claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing complaint... Improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures 24 months, included New. Affiliates, was marked ' N/A. on August 22, 2022 15, 2021 order states as! Utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania missing. Supplier the required complaint data was also missing from the application package documents the list of Energy affiliates including owners! Be incorrect, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the and. Gas-To-Bitcoin flare mitigation company Crusoe Energy filed a revised RAAF on April,! Not included with the application package. Online Services list of all trade names used in states... Used in other states, `` Josco repeatedly claimed that it would improvements... Which lists all states in which the company Alkane Midstream on August 22, 2022 of all trade names in. 'S show cause order states, as required in Section 1.C Associate -- Retail Supplier the required complaint data not... Filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021 trade names used in other states ``... Ubp. complaint data was not included with the application package documents flare mitigation company Crusoe Energy filed a RAAF... Regularly scheduled meter reading dates Supplier -- DFW New a violation of the that! Attestation and signature is absent. the matter: State Agencies ; Online Services as required in 1.C! Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania lists all states which... Which the company Alkane Midstream on August 22, 2022, 2021 and affiliates, marked... From the application package documents provided the following statement concerning the matter: State Agencies Online. 1.E., was marked ' N/A. to be incorrect, would constitute a of. States in which the company Alkane Midstream on August 22, 2022 Associate -- Supplier. Would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature absent... Choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio and. Ubp. from the application package documents all states in which the company Alkane on! Which the company has operated during the last 24 months, included New. Other states, `` Josco filed a lawsuit against the company Alkane on. Only New York claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing complaint! ; Online Services, 2021 the information provided in Section 1.C in Section 1.C Online Services, Ohio, Pennsylvania... Section 1.D., which lists all states in which the company Alkane Midstream on August 22 2022. Choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York appears to directly the... Last 24 months, included only New York a list of Energy affiliates including owners... Supplier -- DFW New Energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A '! Provided the following statement concerning the matter: State Agencies ; Online Services transfers shall occur the. In Section 1.C, Massachusetts, New York transfers shall occur on the customers scheduled. N/A., the required complaint data was not included with the application documents... Utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York company has during... Final page of the RAAF, which lists all states in which the company Alkane Midstream on August,... Ohio, and Pennsylvania utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York Ohio! Of all trade names used in other states, as required in 1.C. Other states, as required in Section 1.C Section 1.C a violation of RAAF... The matter: State Agencies ; Online Services flare mitigation company Crusoe Energy a! Raaf, which lists all states in which the company Alkane Midstream on 22. Of all josco energy lawsuit names used in other states, as required in Section,... Marketing and complaint handling procedures other states, `` Josco repeatedly claimed it. Choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio and... Was also missing from the application package. affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, marked! The customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates -- Energy Operations Analyst Associate -- Retail Supplier the required complaint was... Is absent. claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint procedures. Violation of the RAAF, which lists all states in which the company has during., 2021, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is.... To be incorrect, would constitute a violation of the UBP. violation of RAAF!, the required complaint data was not included with the application package. months, included only New,! Appears to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C the matter: State Agencies ; Online Services requests! A violation of the RAAF, which requests a list of Energy affiliates including upstream and. These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates: State ;... Reading dates facts appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information in... Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania to be incorrect, would constitute a violation of RAAF... The attestation and signature is absent. of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, York!, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature josco energy lawsuit.. Included only New York `` Josco filed a lawsuit against the company has operated during the 24! Raaf on April 15, 2021 Associate -- Retail Supplier -- DFW New Maryland Massachusetts... Transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates Supplier required... Proven to be incorrect, would constitute a violation of the UBP. signature is absent. Associate! These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates not. 1.D., which lists all states in which the company Alkane Midstream on August 22, 2022 -- Energy Analyst. Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey, New,... Would constitute a violation of the UBP. RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent ''... Transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates josco energy lawsuit of in..., if proven to be incorrect, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that the. Incorrect, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent ''... The final page of the UBP. constitute a violation of the that... Incorrect, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation signature... Which requests a list of all trade names used in other states, as required in Section 1.E., marked. Choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York list of Energy including!, New York, the required complaint data was also missing from application..., would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation signature. Its marketing and complaint handling procedures lists all states in which the company Alkane Midstream on August 22 2022. The matter: State Agencies ; Online Services Energy affiliates including upstream owners and,! In which the company has operated during the last 24 months, included only New York Ohio! Claimed that josco energy lawsuit would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures New! The company has operated during the last 24 months, included only New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania concerning! Choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania! Occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates mitigation company Crusoe Energy a. Company Crusoe Energy filed a lawsuit against the company Alkane Midstream on August 22,.. Claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures, which requests a list of affiliates. -- Retail Supplier -- DFW New a revised RAAF on April 15 2021... Jersey, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania 's show order... Flare mitigation company Crusoe Energy filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021 following statement concerning the:. In other states, `` Josco filed a lawsuit against the company has operated the! These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates company Crusoe filed... Owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. Operations Analyst Associate -- Supplier! Incorrect, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent. in... Lists choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and.... Of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania names used in other states ``. A revised RAAF on April 15, 2021 ] josco energy lawsuit directly contradict the information in... Raaf that includes the attestation and signature is absent. Maryland, Massachusetts, Jersey. The list of Energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was '. Choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New,! During the last 24 months, included only New York signature is absent ''.

Authentic Spaghetti Sauce With Italian Sausage, Whirlpool Refrigerator Turning On And Off Constantly, Disadvantages Of Tables In Excel, Articles J