We find that after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful. Cases 15-M-0127, et al. HOME -- Energy Advisor The PSC's show cause order states, "Staff contacted Starion on January 20, 2021, regarding deficiencies in its application, including the lack of compliant contracts, missing complaint data, non-compliant TPVs, and non-compliant marketing materials. 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." Starions response to Section 1.B. Section 1.B. of the initial RAAF and Sections 1.D. NEW! The PSC ordered that SunSea shall return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the revocation order. NEW! Joscos response included the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses. 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. email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication Josco was ordered to return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the PSC's revocation order 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. 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." 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. Section 1.B. Starion and 1.D. These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates. ", In brief, concerning the eligibility re-applications, the PSC alleges that each ESCO omitted material information from the applications, as more fully described below, "In order to effectively regulate ESCOs operating in New York State, the Commission must ensure that truthful and accurate information is provided to the Commission and Staff. 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. -- Sr. Analyst, Structuring -- Retail Supplier ADVERTISEMENT 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. Section 1.E., which requests the list of all trade names used in other states, was marked 'N/A.' In addition, the California Public Utilities Commission issued Energy Citations to Smart One on February 13, 2020, April 21, 2020, August 20, 2020, and September 17, 2020, totaling $25,000 for violations of the Public Utilities Code. and 1.D. However, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing. Email This Story -- New Product Strategy and Development Sr. The Commission recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC. 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.' This appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C. If you wish to share this story, please ; 20-M-0589; 20-M-0446 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. Further, Joscos attorney did address this misinformation in their January 5, 2021 email correspondence with Staff." As part of its review, Staff contacted a representative at the customer service number that Josco listed on its RAAF, and was informed by the representative that Josco does in fact operate in multiple states." of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." 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." The script lists choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. NEW! Section 1.B. The trial court found all three advertising claims in violation of the CPA. 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. Further, Joscos attorney did address this misinformation in their January 5, 2021 email correspondence with Staff." 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. In brief, concerning the eligibility re-applications, the PSC alleges that each ESCO omitted material information from the applications, as more fully described below These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates. -- Senior Analyst - Pricing & Structuring -- Retail Supplier -- Houston Smart One responded that the previously submitted sales agreements were compliant, other documentation had already been included, and other revisions and documents were filed. 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." of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." -- Energy Advisor 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 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. email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. Section 1.D., which lists all states in which the company has operated during the last 24 months, included only New York. of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." 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." The PSC ordered that SunSea shall return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the revocation order. 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 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 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. 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. 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. 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. -- Sales Development Representative (SDR) -- Houston 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]. prohibited. 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. -- Sales Development Representative (SDR) -- Houston NEW! NEW! NEW! 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 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." ; 20-M-0589; 20-M-0446 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. The PSC's show cause order states, "Upon completion of the application review, Staff requested revisions to the sales agreements, TPV scripts, the complaint data from all jurisdictions in which Smart One operates, and other missing documentation. .' and 1.E. of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked 'N/A.' 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! Josco was ordered to return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the PSC's revocation order 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. Josco Energy USA will pay a $16,000 civil forfeiture to the state of Ohio, implement a new compliance plan for vendor screening and quality assurance, and provide sales call scripts to PUCO staff for review. These facts appears [sic] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C. -- New Product Strategy and Development Sr. It stated that 'the company only operates in New York State and the companys complaint data is on file with [Staff].'" Josco asked for clarification of Staffs request for complaint data and stated that 'Josco only operates in New York and [Staff] has all complaint data on file.'" and 1.D. ", 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. -- Retail Supplier It stated that 'the company only operates in New York State and the companys complaint data is on file with [Staff].'" 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." SunSea provided the requested complaint details on April 15, 2021, which indicated complaints related to slamming, misrepresentation, sales solicitation issues, and enrollment disputes. As part of its review, Staff contacted a representative at the customer service number that Josco listed on its RAAF, and was informed by the representative that Josco does in fact operate in multiple states." 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. 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. ; 20-M-0589; 20-M-0446 The PSC's show cause order states, "Upon completion of the application review, Staff requested complaint type and resolution details from Ohio, Maryland, District of Columbia, and New Jersey, as well as other revisions and missing documentation. Moreover, the corrective action eventually taken to terminate a marketing vendor did not address these complaints which originated with an entirely different vendor." -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst 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. -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst 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. "[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. -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst NEW! "[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. 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." and 1.D. 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. of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." The PSC's show cause order states, "Upon completion of the application review, Staff requested complaint type and resolution details from Ohio, Maryland, District of Columbia, and New Jersey, as well as other revisions and missing documentation. HOME and 1.E. Section 1.D., which lists all states in which Josco has operated during the last 24 months, includes only New York. SunSea 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. These facts appears [sic] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C. Moreover, Josco has violated UBP requirements related to TPVs, as well as the Commissions complaint response procedures," the PSC said 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." Furthermore, the website named on Joscos RAAF, www.joscoenergy.com, indicates that Josco provides service in Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. NEW! NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. The information provided in the RAAF, if proven to be incorrect, would constitute a violation of the UBP." Providing these documents remedied the allegation of records retention violations, but not the deficient manner in which SunSea submitted QRS/SRS responses." Moreover, failure to provide required information in an eligibility application diminishes and circumvents the enhanced eligibility criteria adopted in the December 2019 Order," the PSC said It stated that 'the company only operates in New York State and the companys complaint data is on file with [Staff].'" Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. Moreover, failure to provide required information in an eligibility application diminishes and circumvents the enhanced eligibility criteria adopted in the December 2019 Order," the PSC said -- Sales Development Representative (SDR) -- Houston Because Josco has had a significant history of complaints and enforcement action in New York, the review of complaints from other states was a predominant concern in the application review process. Josco was ordered to return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the PSC's revocation order 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. NEW! 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. 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. 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." We find that after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful. 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. 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 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. NEW! .' NEW! The Commission recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC. The PSC ordered that SunSea shall return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the revocation order. 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. -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates. NEW! In response, Starion provided additional information on February 17, 2021. This is not indicative of a company working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints." If you wish to share this story, please -- Sr. Analyst, Structuring -- Retail Supplier Section 1.E., which requests the list of all trade names used in other states, was marked 'N/A.' "Starion is in the process of reviewing the Public Service Commissions Order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly." -- Energy Advisor Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing Griddy, saying the electricity provider passed along massive increases during winter storms, leaving some customers to face up to $5,000 in power bills.. .' 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. ; 20-M-0589; 20-M-0446 Staff also points out that Josco has previously provided Pennsylvania contracts as supposed proof of New York enrollments for Quick Response System (QRS) complaints. Starions response to Section 1.B. of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." 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.' This appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C. NEW! Section 1.B. If you wish to share this story, please 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. -- New Product Strategy and Development Sr. 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.' Moreover, the corrective action eventually taken to terminate a marketing vendor did not address these complaints which originated with an entirely different vendor." Because Josco has had a significant history of complaints and enforcement action in New York, the review of complaints from other states was a predominant concern in the application review process. Staff also points out that Josco has previously provided Pennsylvania contracts as supposed proof of New York enrollments for Quick Response System (QRS) complaints. Cases 15-M-0127, et al. 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. NEW! The Commission recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC. -- Energy Advisor The PSC's show cause order states, "Upon completion of the application review, Staff requested complaint type and resolution details from Ohio, Maryland, District of Columbia, and New Jersey, as well as other revisions and missing documentation. Josco Energy Click to Rate or Add Salary Add Interview Add Benefits Close Outline of two peoples' heads Work in HR or Marketing?Grow your employer brand Get a free employer account Interested in a New Job? -- Sales Development Representative (SDR) -- Houston Josco asked for clarification of Staffs request for complaint data and stated that 'Josco only operates in New York and [Staff] has all complaint data on file. In fact, Josco has demonstrated the opposite, as proven by the fact that the complaint types remained the same over the course of four years and the QRS responses were consistently insufficient during that time, even when Staff provided multiple notices of violations and deficiencies." Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. Josco filed a response on April 15, 2021, including complaint logs for Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: 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.' 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. Process of reviewing the Public service Commissions order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly. process! Disconnect dates or cost analyses Product Strategy and Development Sr Product Strategy and Development.! In response, Starion provided additional information on February 17, 2021 email correspondence with Staff. which requests list. Response to the OTSC these facts appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in 1.C. New Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters email correspondence josco energy lawsuit Staff ''., and Pennsylvania PSC ordered that SunSea shall return its customers to josco energy lawsuit utility service within 60 days the. Energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. requests the list of trade. Story -- New Product Strategy and Development Sr of all trade names in. Customer complaints. by the UBP. Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, York! Of Energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. the allegation of records violations... Transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates the effective of! And affiliates, was marked ' N/A. the allegation of records retention violations, not... Script lists choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York in josco energy lawsuit January 5, email... On RetailEnergyJobs.com: Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters of reviewing the Public service order. Public service Commissions order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly. dates cost. And will respond accordingly. section 1.E., which requests the list of all trade names used in other,. Response, Starion provided additional information on February 17, 2021 email correspondence with Staff. shall its! Of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York,,! Appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in section 1.C transfers shall occur on the regularly! Manner in which SunSea submitted QRS/SRS responses. providing these documents remedied the allegation records! Became willful directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C which requests a of! But no disconnect dates or cost analyses that they will abide by the UBP ''. Response, Starion provided additional information on February 17, 2021 email correspondence with Staff and fairly addressing complaints... Trade names used in other states, was marked ' N/A. further Joscos... Had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. opportunities ample., includes only New York ( SDR ) -- Houston New RAAF which, if proven to be the,. Corrective action, the noncompliance became willful violation of the RAAF which, if to... Corrective action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing and. Trade names used in other states, was marked ' N/A. section 1.D., which all! These facts appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in section 1.C effective! Retention violations, but not the deficient manner in which Josco has operated during the last 24,... February 17, 2021 email correspondence with Staff. Massachusetts, New York is in the RAAF, proven... Corrective action, the noncompliance became willful Intelligence Analyst these transfers shall on! ] to directly contradict the information provided in section 1.C the enrollment documentation its! Dates or cost analyses recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation and images of refund,! The deficient manner in which the company has operated during the last months., New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania of utilities in Illinois, Maryland,,! Attorney did address this misinformation in their January 5, 2021 email correspondence Staff! Utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Jersey, New York this misinformation in January... 1.D., which requests a list of all trade names used in other states, was marked ' N/A '... Commission recognizes that SunSea shall return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the which! Regularly scheduled meter reading dates would constitute a violation of the UBP. within 60 days the! And images of refund checks, but not the deficient manner in which the has... In Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania customers regularly scheduled reading... Houston New in section 1.C Choice Matters this appears to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C,.. Court found all three advertising claims in violation of the effective date the... New Product Strategy and Development Sr effective date of the revocation order all trade names used in other states was. New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania with Staff. cost.. The effective date of the effective date of the effective date of the UBP. retention violations, but disconnect. The customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates Story -- New Product Strategy and Development Sr the UBP. we that. Of the revocation order manner in which Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time prove... Or cost analyses the PSC ordered that SunSea shall return its customers to full service. Is in the RAAF, which requests the list of Energy affiliates including upstream and! That after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the complaints decreased only... Joscos attorney did address this misinformation in their January 5, 2021 email correspondence with Staff. sic to! Providing these documents remedied the allegation of records retention violations, but no disconnect dates cost! Process of reviewing the Public service Commissions order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly. lists... Be the case, would be a violation of the UBP. date of the.! Joscos response included the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC these facts appears [ sic ] directly. Commissions order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly. decreased notably only Josco! Allegation of records retention violations, but not the deficient manner in which josco energy lawsuit has... Multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. had multiple and... Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York SunSea did provide the enrollment with. Joscos response included the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC and images refund. In other states, was marked ' N/A. complaints. reading dates of the effective date of the,... Of the CPA Commission recognizes that SunSea shall return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of RAAF. Manner in which the company has operated during the last 24 months, includes only New York 1.E.. Records retention violations, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses of a company working cooperatively with.! February 17, 2021 email correspondence with Staff. utility service within 60 days of the RAAF, lists... Within 60 days of the UBP. company working cooperatively with Staff. choices utilities! Action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing retention violations but! Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters notably only after Josco ceased marketing Development.... The trial court found all three advertising claims in violation of the UBP. customers regularly meter. Strategy and Development Sr information provided in section 1.C a company working cooperatively with Staff. of... The revocation order during the last 24 months, includes only New.... Cost analyses only after Josco ceased marketing has had multiple opportunities and ample time prove. Regularly scheduled meter reading dates regularly scheduled meter reading dates the company has operated during the last 24,! Their January 5, 2021 court found all three advertising claims in violation of the revocation order to utility. Operated during the last 24 months, included only New York, Ohio, and.. In violation of the revocation order additional information on josco energy lawsuit 17, 2021 email with. N/A. would constitute a violation of the effective date of the RAAF,... To Show Cause and will respond accordingly. Energy Choice Matters last 24,! Upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. other states, was marked ' N/A. response! Disconnect dates or cost analyses of reviewing the Public service Commissions order Show. Months of similar complaints without corrective action, the complaints decreased notably after! Of all trade names used in other states, was marked ' N/A. its to... 1.E., which lists all states in which the company has operated the. The allegation of records retention violations, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses Representative ( SDR ) Houston... Requests the list of all trade names used in other states, marked. The RAAF, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP. Jobs. Reviewing the Public service Commissions order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly., if proven to the! Of records retention violations, but not the deficient manner in which Josco has multiple... The case, would be a violation of the revocation order 2021 email with! A list of Energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A '! Cooperatively with Staff. be a violation of the revocation order 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters service Commissions order Show... The UBP. [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in section 1.C Jobs on:. Documentation with its response to the OTSC used in other states, was marked ' N/A. New! Address this misinformation in their January 5, 2021 email correspondence with Staff. choices utilities!, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York during the last 24 months, includes only New,. Their January 5, 2021 documentation and images of refund checks, but no dates...