Archive for April 2010

PUCT Compliance Audit Findings

Some actual  Compliance Audit Findings…for your consideration.  No these are not public yet.  As negotiations conclude findings will be reduced into an agreed NOV.
 
Requirement:  25.479(c)(1)(A):  Each customer’s bill shall include the following information:  The certified name and address of the REP and the number of the license issued to the REP by the Commission.
Finding:  The company does not publish the certified address on the customer’s bills.
Observation:  Well, that’s one way to read this.  This seems to trigger a penalty anywhere between $2000 and $4000.
 
Requirement:  25.107(j)(1):  The Commission staff or any affected person may bring a complaint seeking to amend, suspend or revoke a REP’s certificate.  Significant violations include the following:  (1) providing false or misleading information to the commission.
Finding:  Company was not in compliance with more customer protection rules than those listed in the Company’s affidavit.
Observation:  This seems to trigger a penalty of $5000.
 
Requirement:  25.475(g)(2)(F)(iii):  For all other variable price products, a notice in bold type no smaller than 12 point font:  For residential customers, the following additional statement is required: “Please review the historical price of this product available at {insert specific website address and toll-free telephone number}.”
Finding:  Only existing customers can access historic rates.
Observation:  customer is a defined term in 25.471, so is appicant.  the rule says what it says.  This seems to trigger a penalty anywhere between $2000 and $4000.
 
Other observations:  Companies were fined irrespective of whether they disclosed the violation in the affidavit, or not.  So, no incentive to include violations in the affidavit as you still get penalized.