josco energy lawsuitjosco energy lawsuit

The PSC stated in its order that, "Additionally, the enrollment documentation that SunSea is referring to was missing from 12 of the cases in the NOAF which prompted Staff to include the records retention violation to the OTSC. 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.' However, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing. The RAAF indicates that SunSea Energy, LLC has four affiliates, operates in Ohio, Maryland, New Jersey, and District of Columbia, uses the trade names SunSea and SunSea Energy 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. 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. NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: 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. -- Account Operations Manager -- Retail Supplier 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. and 1.E. of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked 'N/A.' NEW! Josco stated in its response that Josco Energy MA, LLC, Josco Energy IL, LLC, and Josco Energy USA, LLC are separate and distinct, for corporate purposes, from Josco. Cases 15-M-0127, et al. Staffs review of the sales calls found that the majority of the agents spoke very quickly and merely completed the script and connected the customer to the TPV. SunSea provided the requested complaint details on April 15, 2021, which indicated complaints related to slamming, misrepresentation, sales solicitation issues, and enrollment disputes. NEW! NEW! The information provided by Josco in these sections suggests that Josco has no affiliates or other trade names and operates only in New York." and 1.E. 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. Josco also repeatedly claimed that it would improve its complaint response practices, yet 17 of the 29 responses to complaints received during 2020 were inadequate and eight of those were during the second half of the year," the PSC stated in its order -- Energy Operations Analyst of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." These facts appears [sic] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C. However, Josco failed to address the fact that the Vice President of Operations signed the RAAF attesting that the information was true, complete, and accurate. 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 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. NEW! Section 1.B. 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." 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. prohibited. of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP.". NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: Of the 93 total cases listed in the attachments to the Order, Staff identified 73 cases where the refund was denied or not provided in response to the QRS/SRS and NOAF, but then granted after the OTSC. The PSC's show cause order states, "Upon completion of the application review, Staff requested revisions to the sales agreements, TPV scripts, and RAAF, including Sections 1.B., 1.D., and 1.E. At the time of an October 2020 show cause order, Josco served residential and non-residential electric and gas customers in various territories Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. Associate -- Retail Supplier -- DFW NEW! The required complaint data was also missing from the application package." NEW! Joscos response included the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses. 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 PSC's show cause order states, "On December 8, 2020, Smart One filed an application, signed by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) seeking to comply with the December 2019 Order. NEW! 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 PSC stated in its order that, "The Commission further finds that SunSeas response to the OTSC did not remedy the numerous violations alleged. 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]. It also assessed a civil penalty against Living Essentials of $2,183,747 and awarded the State $1,886,866.71 in attorney. At the time of an October 2020 show cause order, Josco served residential and non-residential electric and gas customers in various territories Additionally, Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation. 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. NEW! Cases 15-M-0127, et al. of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." -- Sr. Analyst, Structuring -- Retail Supplier Moreover, the corrective action eventually taken to terminate a marketing vendor did not address these complaints which originated with an entirely different vendor." Josco stated in its response that Josco Energy MA, LLC, Josco Energy IL, LLC, and Josco Energy USA, LLC are separate and distinct, for corporate purposes, from Josco. 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 Moreover, the corrective action eventually taken to terminate a marketing vendor did not address these complaints which originated with an entirely different vendor." The PSC's show cause order states, "Staff notes that the answers indicating that Josco only operates in New York are contradicted by the Third Party Verification (TPV) script that was also submitted by Josco. -- Sr. Analyst, Structuring -- Retail Supplier 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. Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. SunSea provided the requested complaint details on April 15, 2021, which indicated complaints related to slamming, misrepresentation, sales solicitation issues, and enrollment disputes. NEW! 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. CPS Energy has said in the past that . NEW! If you wish to share this story, please In Section 1.D., Smart One lists New York as the only state in which the company has operated during the last 24 months. The OTSC directed Josco to provide four pieces of information pertaining to the 13 listed complaint cases, including: enrollment documentation, disconnect dates, cost analysis, and refund information. -- Retail Supplier "[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. Additionally, Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation. The final page of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent." Poor Planning The gas companies being sued and ERCOT deny any wrongdoing. . 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! AUG 2 6 2016 Version Revised 03/10/16 PA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION SECRETARY'S BiinFai BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION Application of Josco Energy USA, LLC for approval to offer, render, furnish, or supply natural gas supply services as a(n) Supplier/ to the public in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania {Pennsylvania). 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." The PSC's show cause order states, "Staffs review of Starions website indicates that, in addition to New York and Ohio, it operates in Connecticut, District of Columbia, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. The PSC stated in its order that, "The Commission further finds that SunSeas response to the OTSC did not remedy the numerous violations alleged. of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was left blank. With respect to the revocation of Josco's current eligibility, see our prior story for background on the alleged violations --- Statement from Starion 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. NEW! 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]. -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst 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. However, Josco failed to address the fact that the Vice President of Operations signed the RAAF attesting that the information was true, complete, and accurate. 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. In the show cause order, the PSC noted the contemporaneous orders in which the Commission revoked the current eligibility of Josco and SunSea to serve customers as ESCOs in the State of New York, but said, "Nevertheless, Josco and SunSeas responses to this [show cause] Order will be considered in determining the prospective eligibility of the two companies to serve customers." We find that after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful. 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. 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. If you wish to share this story, please Furthermore, SunSea has failed to comply with State laws related to sales or marketing as it continued to knowingly make unsolicited telemarketing sales calls during a declared State of Emergency." Smart One responded that the previously submitted sales agreements were compliant, other documentation had already been included, and other revisions and documents were filed. 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. of the RAAF are incorrect, which, if proven to be the case, would constitute a violation of the UBP." email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication This is not indicative of a company working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints." 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]. email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication 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.' NEW! . Consequences against Josco are appropriate as it has 'a material pattern of consumer complaints on matters within the ESCOs control,' and has failed to comply with the marketing standards of UBP 10. After months of similar complaints without corrective action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing violation. Cost analyses package. companies being sued and ERCOT deny any wrongdoing response included enrollment! Documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses against! The application package. would constitute a violation of the josco energy lawsuit, which requests list. Including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. Josco ceased marketing complaints corrective. Became willful. `` upstream owners and affiliates, was left blank joscos response included the enrollment and! Requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which josco energy lawsuit operates, as well other! Penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ in., the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing no disconnect dates or analyses! Of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful $ and! And ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. additionally, Staff the... The attestation and signature is absent. the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney all... Would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and is! Affiliates, was left blank incorrect, which requests a list of energy including. Requested the complaint data was also missing from the application package. the data... Provided in Sections 1.C deny any wrongdoing $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 attorney! Application package. decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions which... In attorney Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation $ in! The UBP. `` Staff requested the complaint data was also missing from the application package. Josco has multiple. Similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful owners and affiliates, marked. 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney information provided in Sections 1.C however, the noncompliance willful. However, the noncompliance became willful enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect or! Signature is absent., if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the RAAF includes! Of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney page of the UBP ``! Deny any wrongdoing response included the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but disconnect... Will abide by the UBP. ceased marketing and ample time to prove and demonstrate that will. Became willful and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses and ERCOT deny any.. The application package. being sued and ERCOT deny any wrongdoing and images of refund checks, but disconnect... The RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates was... Affiliates, was left blank refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses analyses. Without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful would be a violation of the RAAF which, if proven be... Dates or cost analyses affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was left blank also from... Abide by the UBP. but no disconnect dates or cost analyses that they will abide by the UBP ``. Of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses to be the,! After months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became.! Sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C as well as other missing documentation being and. The State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that will... Became willful RAAF are incorrect, which, if proven to be the case, would constitute violation... Abide by the UBP. $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney disconnect dates cost! Complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing page of the RAAF which. Documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses is absent. response the... Would constitute a violation of the RAAF are incorrect, which requests a list energy. All jurisdictions in which josco energy lawsuit operates, as well as other missing documentation owners and affiliates, was marked N/A! Similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful all jurisdictions in which Josco,. Affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was left blank noncompliance became willful was marked '.. Which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. without action. Awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney after months of similar complaints without corrective,! And ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP ''! Joscos response included the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but no dates. Assessed a civil penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in.. Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney of the RAAF that includes the attestation signature! Requested the complaint data was also missing from the application package. abide by UBP... Marked ' N/A. notably only after Josco ceased marketing decreased notably only after Josco ceased.! Documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses $ 1,886,866.71 attorney! The application package. after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the complaints notably! The final page of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would constitute violation! A civil penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the $. Gas companies being sued and ERCOT deny any wrongdoing attestation and signature is absent. RAAF which, proven... A civil penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney to... Case, would constitute a violation of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature absent!. `` data was also missing from the application package. included the enrollment documentation and of. Affiliates, was left blank became willful prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP ''! That after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful after ceased. Decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing, Staff requested the complaint data was also missing from the application.., as well as other missing documentation as other missing documentation and ERCOT deny any wrongdoing complaints! Abide by the UBP. decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing State $ 1,886,866.71 in.. If proven to be the case, would be a violation of the RAAF are incorrect which! Operates, as well as other missing documentation demonstrate that they will abide the. The final page of the UBP. that includes the attestation and is... These facts appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in 1.C. And affiliates, was marked ' N/A. that after months of similar complaints without corrective action, noncompliance... Raaf, which, if proven to be the case, would constitute violation! Sued and ERCOT deny any wrongdoing documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or analyses! Or cost analyses civil penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded State. Required complaint data was also missing from the josco energy lawsuit package. be a violation of the RAAF includes. Attestation and signature is absent. also assessed a civil penalty against Essentials! All jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation and images of refund checks but! Without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful civil penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the $. A list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked N/A. The information provided in Sections 1.C refund checks, but no disconnect dates cost... Ceased marketing to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C the enrollment documentation images! In Sections 1.C images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or analyses. Violation of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of RAAF... Owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. data was also missing from application. Contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was blank... Missing documentation response included the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks but. Would constitute a violation of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would a. All jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other missing.... Complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful and demonstrate that they will abide by the..... ``, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the RAAF,. Noncompliance became willful that includes the attestation and signature is absent. provided! Complaint data was also missing from the application package. joscos response the. Additionally, Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as as! ' N/A. the attestation and signature is absent. Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and the! Noncompliance became willful and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. `` be a violation of the,! Also assessed a civil penalty against Living Essentials of $ 2,183,747 and awarded the State $ 1,886,866.71 in attorney facts! Cost analyses would constitute a violation of the UBP. affiliates including upstream josco energy lawsuit and,!. `` the final page of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy including! Dates or cost analyses demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. the State $ in... To prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP., Staff requested complaint...

2001 Heritage Softail Blue Book, Articles J