Standard Industry Practice Or Fraud?

Posted by Dennis Herrick on January 08, 2010 at 10:36:21:

Latest from the Google Group, Get-Rid-Of-Unitil. Let me see, how do I get in touch with the NH Public Utilities Commission directly or the AGs Office. Hm, how do I lodge a complaint? I think it's time for another Getting Even 101 assignment. Unitil has had a AMI system in place since at least 2007. They knew when each customer's power came back on after the December 2008 ice storm and they knew exactly how much power each customer really used in December 2008. Yet they insulted customers with estimated bills. Plus I have pictures of a priceless piece of Unitil power line maintenance right in Plaistow. They cut Pollard Road to the bone and left this problem on a road nearby in plain sight.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carl Strathmeyer

I just sent this email to Jed Nosal at the AG's office.

=====================

Hello Jed,

Another question related to Unitil’s smart meter (AMI) system and the
December 2008 ice storm.

Most Unitil FG&E customers received an estimated bill during the
billing cycle immediately after the ice storm. These estimated bills
did not take into account the extended outages caused by the storm;
instead, the estimated bills were based on prior customer history of
full month electric usage. Given that Unitil had an automated meter
reading system (the “AMI system”) in place at the time, one wonders
why estimated bills were rendered at all. Unitil’s smart meters report
daily electric usage to a central collection point. If the smart meter
loses its connection with the collection system, it is probably
because the power lines are down and the customer is not receiving
electrical power. When power is restored, connectivity between the
customer meter and the collection point is simultaneously restored.

In other words, Unitil HAD reasonably accurate usage data for the
December period, during which most FG&E customers had only 2-3 weeks
of service. Instead, they apparently chose to bill for a typical full
month of power consumption.

I can only assume that this decision was taken to improve Unitil’s
cash flow immediately after the difficult storm period.

Is this not a fraudulent billing practice?

--Carl Strathmeyer
Lunenburg, MA
Unitil FG&E ratepayer

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:


This message board now requires a password for posting.
Our aim is to prevent spambots from attacking the board - 
 not to keep users like you from posting. Please enter 
 the letters as you see them to the left (match case).

Optional Link URL : 
Link Title        : 
Optional Image URL: