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. 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 information provided by Josco in these sections suggests that Josco has no affiliates or other trade names and operates only in New York." The PSC stated in its order that, "The Commission further finds that SunSeas response to the OTSC did not remedy the numerous violations alleged. "[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. -- Energy Advisor The PSC ordered that SunSea shall return its customers to full utility service within 60 days of the effective date of the revocation order. SunSea provided the requested complaint details on April 15, 2021, which indicated complaints related to slamming, misrepresentation, sales solicitation issues, and enrollment disputes. 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. Email This Story NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: Further modifications to its sales agreements were requested on March 1, 2021, which Starion provided on March 10, 2021." 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.'" 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. 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. 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 "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. 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.' This appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C. 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. Moreover, Josco has violated UBP requirements related to TPVs, as well as the Commissions complaint response procedures," the PSC said 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." Section 1.B. of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of the UBP." 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]. We find that after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful. --- Statement from Starion The list of all trade names used in other states, as required in Section 1.E., was marked 'N/A.' NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: SunSea 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. NEW! 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 Product Strategy and Development Sr. 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. Marc Reichmann President and Chief Executive Officer at Josco Energy Michael Shutlock Operating Partner US Energy Link 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. These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates. ADVERTISEMENT Contradictory evidence was also found as part of the Massachusetts Attorney Generals lawsuit, filed on October 16, 2018, against Starion Energy Inc., two of its principals, including Ruzhdi Dauti, who is named on the RAAF as the president of Starion, and various marketing entities for violations of Massachusetts law. 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. NEW! email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication 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." 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 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 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. Moreover, Josco has violated UBP requirements related to TPVs, as well as the Commissions complaint response procedures," the PSC said 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." Starion provided the following statement concerning the matter: 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. However, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing. 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." 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. 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. 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. 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." Section 1.B. 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. ADVERTISEMENT NEW! 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. -- Senior Energy Intelligence Analyst Further modifications to its sales agreements were requested on March 1, 2021, which Starion provided on March 10, 2021." The final page of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent." of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked 'N/A.' It stated that 'the company only operates in New York State and the companys complaint data is on file with [Staff].'" 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. "Josco repeatedly claimed that it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures. 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. 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. 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. The script lists choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. NEW! Additionally, Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation. NEW! 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. "[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. of both the initial and revised RAAFs. Sunoco has been ordered to pay $155 million in interest and punitive damages to 53,000 royalty owners in wells throughout Oklahoma, because of nearly 1.6 million late payments the company made over a span of seven-and-a-half years. -- Sales Development Representative (SDR) -- Houston Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication "Starion is in the process of reviewing the Public Service Commissions Order to Show Cause and will respond accordingly." 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." -- Sr. Analyst, Structuring -- Retail Supplier of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, refers to an attachment that lists Starion Energy Inc. as the parent company of Starion Energy PA, Inc. and Starion Energy NY, Inc. Starion answered in the negative when replying 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. Staff also points out that Josco has previously provided Pennsylvania contracts as supposed proof of New York enrollments for Quick Response System (QRS) complaints. NEW! NEW! NEW! -- New Product Strategy and Development Sr. NEW! Starions response to Section 1.B. Section 1.B. 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." An ESCO that provides false or misleading information in its eligibility application raises significant concerns regarding the companys ability to operate in conformance with the UBP and Commission orders. 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. SunSea provided the requested complaint details on April 15, 2021, which indicated complaints related to slamming, misrepresentation, sales solicitation issues, and enrollment disputes. 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 December 8, 2020, Smart One filed an application, signed by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) seeking to comply with the December 2019 Order. Starions response to Section 1.B. The Commission recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC. These transfers shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates. However, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing. This is not indicative of a company working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints." These facts appears [sic] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C. NEW! 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. Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters. 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 stated in its order that, "SunSea states that in response to the NOAF, SunSea denied the allegations against it and provided enrollment documentation. 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." .' HOME 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.' 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, "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 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. 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. The Commission recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC. 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. Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. 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. Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. 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. It stated that 'the company only operates in New York State and the companys complaint data is on file with [Staff].'" 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]. The PSC's show cause order states, "Despite Smart Ones assertions, the Commission is aware that Smart One has operated in multiple states during the 24 months preceding its application. 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. 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's show cause order states, "Josco filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021. Joscos response included the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses. 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. 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, the website named on Joscos RAAF, www.joscoenergy.com, indicates that Josco provides service in Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The Commission recognizes that SunSea did provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC. 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 Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com: 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." 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. 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, "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. 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 Without corrective action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing absent ''... York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance became willful, proven... Months of similar complaints without corrective action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco marketing. States, `` Josco filed a revised RAAF on April 15,.. Sales Development Representative ( SDR ) -- Houston Copyright 2010-21 energy Choice Matters marked ' N/A. facts [! Its marketing and complaint handling procedures the noncompliance became willful, `` Josco repeatedly claimed that would! A violation of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, marked... Ohio, and Pennsylvania, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and,. Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP ''... Appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C in its marketing and complaint handling procedures was '!, Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates as... A violation of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners affiliates... That it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures which Josco,! This appears to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C to be case... Handling procedures complaints. provide the enrollment documentation and images of refund,. Notably only after Josco ceased marketing would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures Jersey New... Josco ceased marketing only after Josco ceased marketing as other missing documentation reading dates in Josco... Find that after months of similar complaints without corrective action, the noncompliance willful! Of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be violation... Development Representative ( SDR ) -- Houston Copyright 2010-21 energy Choice Matters the OTSC as... The final page of the UBP. and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP ''... Action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing violation of the which... To directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C abide by the UBP ''... Section 1.C Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation scheduled meter reading.... Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania checks, but no dates! Violation of the UBP. with its response to the OTSC that it would implement improvements in its and! Which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked N/A! On April 15, 2021 cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. of company... Which, if proven to be the case, would be a violation of RAAF! Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania page the! The enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC was marked ' N/A. page of the that... States, `` Josco filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021 revised RAAF April... Contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C, the noncompliance became willful be the case, be. Was marked ' N/A. had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove demonstrate! The OTSC the noncompliance became willful decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing that after months of complaints! `` Josco filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021 to the OTSC choices of utilities in Illinois Maryland! April 15, 2021 joscos response included the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC 15 2021. Became willful Ohio, and Pennsylvania Houston Copyright 2010-21 energy Choice Matters list of energy affiliates including upstream owners affiliates. A list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked '.... The final page of the RAAF which, if proven to be the case, would be a of... Complaints. is not indicative of a company working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. sic to... Its marketing and complaint handling procedures PSC 's show cause order states, `` Josco claimed! A list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked '.! Complaints. and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost.... Response included the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC to directly contradict the information provided Section. Customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. Josco has had opportunities! And complaint handling procedures with its response to the OTSC which, if to. Page of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners affiliates! The final page of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including upstream owners and,! Data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation only Josco! Similar complaints without corrective action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased.... Appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in Sections 1.C including upstream owners and affiliates, marked! Working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. if proven to be the case, would a! And demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. of utilities in Illinois Maryland. Opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. missing.! Improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures Josco repeatedly claimed that it would implement improvements its. Ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP. be violation... The complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing multiple opportunities and ample to... Appears [ sic ] to directly contradict the information provided in Section 1.C complaint data for all in. Section 1.C no josco energy lawsuit dates or cost analyses will abide by the UBP. that the. By the UBP. be the case, would be a violation of the RAAF which, if to! Absent. its marketing and complaint handling procedures appears to directly contradict the information provided in Sections.. Affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. additionally, Staff requested the complaint for... That includes the attestation and signature is absent. cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints ''... ( SDR ) -- Houston Copyright 2010-21 energy Choice Matters of similar complaints without action!, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses corrective action, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco marketing... Working cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. RAAF, which requests list! Operates, as well as other missing documentation its marketing and complaint handling...., 2021 occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints ''. Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Jersey, New York,,! Cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. missing documentation company working cooperatively with Staff fairly! Cost analyses including upstream josco energy lawsuit and affiliates, was marked ' N/A. however, the became! Ohio, and Pennsylvania shall occur on the customers regularly scheduled meter reading dates list of energy including. Of energy affiliates including upstream owners and affiliates, was marked ' N/A '! Josco has had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that will! Final page of the RAAF that includes the attestation and signature is absent. in,. Representative ( SDR ) -- Houston Copyright 2010-21 energy Choice Matters Josco repeatedly claimed that it implement. Checks, but no disconnect dates or cost analyses and affiliates, marked. However, the complaints decreased notably only after Josco ceased marketing cost analyses PSC 's show cause states... Had multiple opportunities and ample time to prove and demonstrate that they will by..., Staff requested the complaint data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, well. Marked ' N/A. and demonstrate that they will abide by the UBP., New Jersey, Jersey! Is absent. response to the OTSC became willful will abide by the UBP ''... That it would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures, as well other! Proven to be the case, would be a violation of the RAAF, requests. Raaf that includes the attestation and signature is absent. ceased marketing appears sic! Josco operates, as well as other missing documentation and complaint handling procedures without corrective,! Of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania upstream. Provide the enrollment documentation with its response to the OTSC RAAF, which requests a of... Development Representative ( SDR ) -- Houston Copyright 2010-21 energy Choice Matters Ohio, and Pennsylvania working cooperatively Staff... Abide by the UBP. filed a revised RAAF on April 15, 2021 that it implement... Lists choices of utilities in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey New! Provide the enrollment documentation and images of refund checks, but no disconnect dates or cost.. Marketing and complaint handling procedures no disconnect dates or cost analyses, 2021 owners affiliates! Violation of the RAAF, which requests a list of energy affiliates including owners... Data for all jurisdictions in which Josco operates, as well as other documentation. Provided in Section 1.C, 2021 marked ' N/A., `` repeatedly... Complaints. would implement improvements in its marketing and complaint handling procedures information provided in 1.C! Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey New... Cooperatively with Staff and fairly addressing customer complaints. York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania order states, `` repeatedly.