Spokane7
61°
December 16, 2010 in City
Avista fined for handling energy assistance money
State regulators fined Avista Corp. more than $60,000 for improper handling of customer accounts. Most of the violations were related to errors in how energy-assistance dollars were credited to low-income families.
Avista was putting the money toward customer’s old past-due bills, instead of crediting it toward current and upcoming payments.
“That money is intended to keep the heat and the lights on right now,” said Sharon Wallace, assistant director for consumer protection at the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. “What happened was that the company applied the money … to old balances.”
That put some customers at immediate risk of having their power shut off, she said.
In once instance, a customer owed Avista at least $1,200 in past due bills. When the customer received $928 in credits through two energy assistance pledges, all of the money was applied to the old bills, instead of current and upcoming bills.
Commission staff uncovered 621 violations of state consumer protection rules by Avista, with 573 of the violations for misapplying energy-assistance credits to old debt.
Each day the money was incorrectly credited is one violation, Wallace said. Each violation carries a $100 fine.
Avista has 15 days to respond to the investigation. The company can pay the fine, request a hearing to contest the findings or ask the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission to reduce the fine.
Avista officials said Thursday that they were reviewing the commission’s findings.
“Avista and the (commission) share a common concern for our customers and both want to help them avoid an interruption in their service because of non-payment,” Vicki Weber, the company’s customer service director, said in a statement. “We believe that certain aspects of the rules are unclear, and we look forward to working with commission staff in order to avoid future misunderstandings.”
Wallace said the current rules have been in place for at least 10 years. As recently as 2007, commission staff sent a “technical assistance” letter to utilities, explaining how energy-assistance credits should be applied, she said.
The state regulations aren’t intended to keep Avista or other utilities from collecting on bad debts, Wallace said. But the energy-assistance dollars are specifically geared toward “ensuring that customers have energy even when something difficult is occurring in their lives,” she said.
That could be the loss of a job or a medical emergency, she said.
Commission staff initiated the investigation after a routine review of consumer complaints against energy companies in Washington.
The audit of Avista’s accounts covered part of 2009. The commission staff randomly selected for detailed review 166 accounts that had their power shut off in October of that year. The staff also reviewed 101 consumer complaints filed against Avista between June and December 2009.
The other Avista violations were related to inaccurate billing statements, improper notification of power shut-offs and errors in deposit requirements.
Avista reported 19,852 disconnects for customers who didn’t pay their bills in 2009.
Miners to return to Lucky Friday 
johnclarke on December 16 at 3:45 p.m.
Oooh a whole 60k. Guess the CEO will have to quit lighting his cigars with $100 bills.
citizen on December 16 at 3:51 p.m.
Thik Avista cares? Avista doesn’t pay it—WE DO, the customer. Avista only has the money we pay them so in real truth we, the customers are being fined. They should have just fired the person/persons responsible for screwing up. Citizen
misjustice on December 16 at 4:00 p.m.
I’m sure that it was an inadvertent, unavoidable, deeply regretted (that they got caught) mistake.
Right, Dan? Let’s hear your corporate spin…
deacon46 on December 16 at 4:18 p.m.
How about the fine coming out of the Executives pockets instead of yours. The Exceutives get bonuses for adding to the bottom , how about some penalty for screwing over the customer. Where are you Dan ? Lets hear the BS.
zelda on December 16 at 4:44 p.m.
Oh, man. I REALLY want a fuller explanation of how Avista was monkeying with the Project Share donations. I’ve been giving to this program every month for years, all the while thinking I was helping to keep the lights and heat on for families in need. Now it sounds like it should be called Project Snare.
I’m calling tomorrow to have my auto-pay adjusted to terminate my Project Share contribution. I’ll just send it directly to SNAP from now on.
Dan_at_Avista on December 16 at 4:47 p.m.
This group always makes me feel so welcome, but that’s OK, I can take it. I won’t overload you with too many facts, but know this: all energy assistance grants that customers receive are fully applied to their accounts. What’s in question with this fine is where on the account the money should be applied – what they owed (past due from non-payment) or only to current and future amounts billed since the service was reconnected. So, should assistance grants be applied to past due amounts? The WUTC says no in this instance. That’s pretty much it.
If you’re interested is discussing this further in an actual conversation, check out our blog post on the subject here: http://www.avistautilities.com/community/blog/default.aspx
Zelda, I hope you will reconsider your actions regarding Project Share. Its a wonderful program that has helped thosands in our community.
misjustice on December 16 at 4:50 p.m.
Well, Dan, as for the welcome wagon, suck it up; you get paid to come on these blogs.
schleufer on December 16 at 4:52 p.m.
sombody is going to get a bonus for correcting the problem.
SugarShane on December 16 at 4:55 p.m.
They took my grany and applied it to a past due amount and to pay off a reconnection “deposit” of 180$ and an additional fee. Now that it actually winter, my bill is back to zero with no credit to help me thru the coldest months. I contacted avista and Dan the man both and they said well sorry, we did what we are allowed to, please have more money next time you’re in need.
SugarShane on December 16 at 4:56 p.m.
grant that is, before I get all the comentary
eagleproducer on December 16 at 5:01 p.m.
Less than $100.00 per violation. Now that’s some regulatory teeth.
The interest generated from the Project Share “trust” has helped a few in our community.
Proof read, Dan, proof read. I’m going to use your post next week in the classroom for a “grammar/usage” activity. I’ll make sure to give you full credit.
mikeln on December 16 at 5:07 p.m.
The process exist to remove these people. The rate payers need to get it together, hire a lawyer, and make this a PUD. This is the only way to take what belongs to everybody back from the good old boys and get charged fairly for your power needs.
eagleproducer on December 16 at 5:10 p.m.
I believe the intent of energy assistance is to provide for service from the time of receipt of assistance. It shouldn’t be a way for Avista to clear their books of past due amounts. Turn them over to collection like the rest of the business world or establish payment plans that are separate and distinct from the granted funds. I would think most people who donate to the program would agree this approach is reasonable.
eagleproducer on December 16 at 5:12 p.m.
mikeln: Let’s get it going, brother! I’d like a non-profit co-op type of set up for starters!
zelda on December 16 at 5:23 p.m.
So if I understand this correctly (and yes, I read the Avista website) that the utility applied the grant funds to the oldest past-due bill. So there’s an accounting approach (which seems to put the shareholders first) and then there’s the moral approach, which would be to keep families warm and illuminated in the here and now.
I don’t know what the GAAP standards are for this but the UTC ruling implies that there is a standardized and accepted way to do this (how are other WA utilities doing it?) and Avista deviated.
misjustice on December 16 at 5:26 p.m.
Hey, Dan, how’s that audit of the books going?
You know, the one ordered after the regulators found that your company was charging rate payers for things like “professional” photographs and retirement parties? And now this mishandling of grants from the federal gubmint?
I know, I know, it’s not Avista’s fault and we are just the unwashed masses that couldn’t begin to fathom how difficult it is to run a protected monopoly; with a guaranteed profit.
mikeln on December 16 at 5:29 p.m.
I don’t live in Spokane but hope people look into this and get the ball rolling. Would like to see these crooks faces though when they realize that the people have power when they unite. Been off the grid for years and do not miss avitas bills at all.
truthseaker99 on December 16 at 5:49 p.m.
Well, I read the Dan doubletalk but this now sounds like a moral issue, not just one of accounting, i.e. the primary beneficiary is Avista. So what does the head of Avista have to sayl. What say you Scott Morris.
lowtechmaster on December 16 at 5:54 p.m.
News Bulletin: January 2, 2011. Avista has asked for increases in its electric and natural gas rates of 3% because of “unexpected increases in expenses” [read: the fines they–read ‘we’ had to pay]. State regulators for the WUTC are said to be ready to approve such modest increases.
Dan, Is it not true that it is money the rate payers, not from the investors, that pays such fines?
If you have ever answered any of my many questions before, I missed the answers. Please answer this one.
Albert on December 16 at 6:06 p.m.
Please Dan, save us from the attempt of self pity, you are not funny. Avista lacks corporate integrity this we know and understand. It is absolutely beyond my limited understanding why a “for profit” corporation is allowed to operate a public utility monopoly. As I investigated the various public campaign donations records, it is also disgusting to note who Avista supported with their revenues derived from a captive audience. The only way this corruption can be effectively addressed is a Public “Non-profit” Utility. This will never happen of course with the monies flowing to the elected officials. Disgusting is the best word that I can come up with.
Albert on December 16 at 6:08 p.m.
Apologies for the second comment, but Friend Zelda, please consider the Union Gospel Mission for your gifts. They feed the hungry and homeless who have been tossed out because they could not pay their outrageous utility bill.
Diana on December 16 at 6:16 p.m.
Dan…cupcake, you might want to consider a new marketing strategy at your place. Most people are hip to corporate piggies like Avista these days and you’re not going to find a lot of sympathy.
notanidiot101 on December 16 at 6:27 p.m.
It’s hard to fathom, at times like these, AND EVERY OTHER TIME, how someone like the CEO of Avista can sleep at night making a salary for what most people make in ten years, in just one.
lowtechmaster on December 16 at 6:28 p.m.
Our friendly neighborhood predator, Avista, was fined only $60,000 for the 621 violations that were discovered. At about $100 a pop. How much did Avista take in with Project Share? I assumed that was for foks who needed help paying for heat in the winter. Obviously, I was wrong. We need the WUTC and/or the legislature to make Avista NOT turn off the heat or electricity in the winter for those who do not have the means to pay their bills.
zelda on December 16 at 6:31 p.m.
I’m going to try to be fair and concede that maybe Avista doesn’t want to completely explain the in’s and out’s of not paying one’s utility bill while also tapping emergency aid. There are people out there that I’m sure are adept at gaming the system.
That said, I tend to think that the utility commission thinks there is one proper way to administer these funds and Avista was not in compliance. As much as people would like to think there are accounting principles (oxymoron), the free-market environment that has prevailed for the past 10+ years has allowed a lot of flexibility in interpretation.
We can be faily sure, however, that Avista will spend a lot of time and money disputing the fine.
notanidiot101 on December 16 at 6:32 p.m.
lowtechmaster: normally, you would think, as a human being, that you couldn’t have the morals to turn off someones electricity in the middle of winter. My bad!!
notanidiot101 on December 16 at 6:37 p.m.
What I am waiting to hear next is, that Avista turned off someone’s electricity for non-payment, and that same persons electricity powered their life support systems that they are using during their cancer treatment. Deadbeats!! Avista will get them to pay one way or another!!! But before they actually have the authority to turn it off, they have to get final approval from the CEO, but he’s currently in Europe vacationing with his family and fifty of their closest friends.
hawken on December 16 at 6:53 p.m.
Here’s an idea, all….
As voters, let’s require any Congress, any President and his administration are significantly “fined” for the multi-billion dollar screw-ups they make each and every year with out tax dollars.
I’m thinking that might be “change we can trust in.”
You all … “squint at a gnat and swallow a camel.”
liberal_in_right_wing_land on December 16 at 6:55 p.m.
Avista is crap, they need to be turned into a PUD. Is there anyway at all we the citizens can make this happen? I know there are other cities have their electricity companies as PUD’s and their bills are far lower than what we are paying. I think its time to turn Avista into a PUD and its time we the citizens of Spokane demand this to happen and demand Avista stop their corruption and rate gauging.
Dan_at_Avista on December 16 at 7:35 p.m.
I’ve said this on previous comment threads here and on other websites, but I’ve yet to be taken up on the offer - I would be happy to talk in person with any of you who are willing to discuss your concerns about the company (or anything else for that matter). Send me an e-mail at conversation@avistautilities.com and we can find a time and place.
As customers, you have every right to question the companies that work for you. As a spokesperson for the company, my job is to explain issues that are often complex. You may have noticed that I rarely respond to questions on these threads anymore. This is not to duck your questions, only that I personally feel that the discussions on this website in particular aren’t a true “discussion” at all. Writing and commenting in attack and defend mode isn’t productive for any of us.
I invite you to visit the section of our website called Energy on the Street: www.avistautilities.com/street Where customers just like you asked us questions and we answered them. We’re still taking questions and given the response here today I can only assume that you’d be willing to join in.
This is your invitation to an actual conversation about what concerns you. I hope you take me up on my offer. Surprise me. Conversation@avistautilities.com
schleufer on December 16 at 7:51 p.m.
ok dan here is a thought or 2. the coeur d alenes next week will get thier final settlement payment for over 100 years of the power company using thier land for water storage. the settlement equals about 10 cents on the dollar for what was actually owed. do you treat everybody that way or just indians? i have perfect credit as i pay my bills every month in full and dont use the courts and lawyers for putting off payment for a century then only pay a tiny fraction. so if its ok for your company to do that to me is it ok for me to enjoy say the next century of using the electricity and not paying the bill? maybe we can work somthing out here. ill keep using the power til the year 2110 without paying the bill and then we can discuss some sort of terms. what do ya say…how bout stop billing me til im 155 years old?
Edwame on December 16 at 8:09 p.m.
The sad part is that now more people may be reluctant to participate in project share and other similar projects. There is a increased perception that all of the donated money doesn’t fully get to end user without administrative costs and red tape.
Another thought: I wonder if people are reluctant to go to the Avista blog as it is moderated and therefore not truly an open conversation (please correct me if this is not the case) and therefore Avista’s “home field”, where as this forum is in most cases not moderated. I would agree that there is not always constructive back and forth dialog here and more of a forum for opinions.
hawken on December 16 at 8:23 p.m.
Dan… you are to be applauded for your perseverance.
misjustice on December 16 at 8:30 p.m.
“You may have noticed that I rarely respond to questions on these threads anymore.”
And yet you continue to show up here. Why?
@ Chickenhawken; CAUTION: if Dan turns suddenly your neck will get broken.
; )
mikeln on December 16 at 8:41 p.m.
There was a article in the colville news paper a couple of months ago about turning avista into a PUD. I will try and find it and post the names of the people to contact, they were looking for people to get the ball rolling.
LW509 on December 16 at 8:47 p.m.
After reading the Spokesman’s article as well as the article that Avista posted it seems that quite a few people are posting about how Avista’s Executives are paid. As this may be a general frustration to some, I don’t think any of us are privy to the executives’ daily agenda to maintain their business. This doesn’t seem to be the issue. After reading both articles, I find it interesting that the Spokesman left out a large and important part of the original quote by an Avista Exec. Here is the quote in its entirety that the Spokesman pulled from:
“Avista and the UTC share a common concern for our customers and both want to help them avoid an interruption in their service because of non-payment,” said Vicki Weber, Avista’s director of customer service. “All energy assistance grants customers receive are fully applied to their account - that fact is not in question by the UTC. We believe that certain aspects of the rules are unclear, and we look forward to working with commission staff in order to avoid future misunderstandings.”
“All energy assistance grants customers receive, are fully applied to their account - that fact is not in question…” is the part Spokesman left out. It seems that some are arguing on this blog about where the funds are going, and Zelda I know in the beginning you were saying you are going to stop donating to project share. It is obvious that the correct use of this fund is not in question.
There is a fund set up for people who cannot pay their energy bill. The question is, can the funds be used towards a bill that was not payed for by the customer.
If a customer uses energy but fails to pay their bill, Avista pays for that energy. Obviously the energy is purchased before the consumer uses the gas or electric. To me, it doesn’t seem like Avista was extremely negligent if some sort of fund was applied to catch people up to create a zero balance. Bottom line is, you have to pay for energy you use. If you can’t afford it, you sign up for financial aid. If the fund was used to catch people up so they don’t have a past balance that seems ethical.
If the fund is used towards future bills for customers who cannot afford electricity or gas, what is the difference if you use it towards a past bill or future bill. The money is going to used electricity and gas no matter when you pay for it.
It doesn’t seem that this issue is whether or not Avista was being ethical, bottom line is that funds and grants are helping those in need. The money is going to those in need either after they couldn’t pay their bill, or to prevent them from ‘non-payment.’
Here is another part that the Spokesman left out of the article:
“When an energy assistance grant is received for a customer who has had a service interruption for non-payment, Avista applies the funds to the customer’s past due amount - including prior balance - to help bring the account balance to zero. Prior balance is the dollar amount, excluding deposit amounts owed, the utility has billed to the customer for the energy they have already used and for which the utility has not received payment at the time the service was disconnected for nonpayment.”
I, like most of the readers, am a paying Avista customer. If my money isn’t going to the right place I would be outraged as well. That just doesn’t seem to be the case here. Spokesman really missed a lot of key points from the original Avista letter. As a Spokane citizen, I feel as though unfair reporting is unethical.
If you want to educate yourself on the matter, you should read both articles. Here is the link I used to find the original: http://www.avistautilities.com/community/blog/default.aspx
opiemuyo on December 16 at 9:11 p.m.
Hmm, If I was Avista I would drop the program, and let someone else pickup all the administration of it. Less trouble all around.
liarsinnews on December 16 at 9:37 p.m.
AVISTA officials have a history as being pathological liars. When WWP aka AVISTA were in cahoots with ENRON a few years ago, Avista was fined over $2.million. You know who took it in the shorts for the 2mil. That wasn`t bad enough, the brass at Avista screwed up big time on Wall Street and tried to hang the blame on one of their employees who had committed suicide, but there was a problem. The low life executives forgot to look at the calendar and the poor soul had been dead for several days during the time he was suppose to have been the AVISTA trader re natural gas futures on Wall Street. These people running the monopoly should be ashamed of themselves but these scumbags who pulled the stuff I`ve mentioned, are too arrogant and have no shame. Stealing from the poor is right down their alley.
west on December 16 at 10:01 p.m.
From Avista’s propaganda site:
“Avista is a regulated utlity. That term – regulated utlity – is important, to provide safe, reliable service.
because it means regulators set our rates. Sometmes there’s a
misperception that Avista is unregulated – a monopoly that can raise rates
whenever it wants.
Actually, the opposite is true. Because we’re a regulated utlity, we must
go through a detailed public process when we propose a rate change. We
must demonstrate that the rate change is justfied, or it won’t be approved.”
In one breath Avista says regulators set their rates and next breath they set their rates.
lewis8457 on December 16 at 10:22 p.m.
I guess i am missing something here. If i don’t pay my bill i get turned off. if I then get a grant how can i expect avista to turn me back on if the grant doesn’t pay the past due debt?
If that debt isn’t paid then the next bill is dozy and the whole thing starts all over again.
This isn’t a pair of shoes this is a consistent service. Which needs to be continually paid for. If they have to go to collections then the meter is removed from the house.
Sometimes i get a SNAP grant in the spring it pays off my winter heat past due with Avista and gives me credit for a few more months. Plus there is like no lines.
Sure their rates go up like crazy i am non too happy about that but I am non too happy about driving around on pot holed streets when my property taxes go up 12% every year! This is Spokane the land of taking it up the you know what. Nothing will change ……period.
Two things i really like about Avista they always work with me on my bill and they have flawless service where i live my power hasn’t been knocked out for more then maybe 5 minutes in 12 years of service, oh 3 things they always show up if i call they are like Qwest it is instant service.
D Statler on December 16 at 10:29 p.m.
AVISTA need not worry. The UTC will obviously rule in their favor no matter what the request is.Having the UTC, AVISTA and the conflict of interest specialists(the Washington State Attourneys General office) together is like having a pack of wolves in a chicken ranch. These people feed on the little guys. The UTC and the RatePayers are represented by the ATG’s office.Who do you think will win that decision?
I am saddened by the attitude in America that anything goes when the allmighty dollar can be made. This is just another example of how a perverted society has come to care only about corporate dividends and not the health of America in general.
Go ahead and shut off those 19,000 households AVISTA ! When the families freeze to death, we can render the peasants. Hospitals write off the money owed.Maybe AVISTA should pass this on to the taxpayers also.
zelda on December 16 at 10:47 p.m.
It all sounds like an accounting labyrinth to me, i.e., accrual policies and practices and all that fun stuff.
I don’t think that Avista is any more or less opaque than other publically traded utilities. It’s just that the unctuous tone gets on my nerves.
All of them adopt the same friendly, avuncular manner of communicating with customers but then you have situations like the one PG&E has created for itself with smart meters in CA. This AP story is an example of the lengths that one particular utility resorted to in order to squash activists —
>>Despite Pacific Gas & Electric claims he acted alone, internal documents show information from online snooping by a former executive was widely shared with employees at the San Francisco-based utility. William Devereaux, the former senior director of PG&E’s SmartMeter program, resigned last month after admitting he used a phony name to monitor online discussion groups by activists opposed to SmartMeters. The San Jose Mercury News says internal PG&E documents turned over to state regulators and obtained by the newspaper on Monday also reveal that PG&E went beyond mere online monitoring. A series of e-mail exchanges, for instance, show that PG&E sent an employee to monitor a SmartMeter demonstration in Rohnert Park in October. The employee took at least four photographs of protesters. <<
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_16854936?nclick_check=1
Still wanna have a Conversation@avistautilities? Anybody?
cjdavis54 on December 16 at 11:08 p.m.
Yes, Avista really needs to be allowed to raise costs by 3% Especially since anyone on Social Security recipients haven’t received their 3% cost of living raises for 2 years.
Makes it real easy for those of us on Social Security to keep our heads above water.
Project share may help many people, but since I receive $7.00 over the maximum allowed I get zero help…and many others are in the same boat. Though know there are others that are worse off than I am, but it still irritates me.
Not only do I think that Avista needs to be taken down a notch but I also think the City Utilities needs to be brought down a peg or two as well.
eagleproducer on December 20 at 9:34 a.m.
I like Dan’s quaint approach of meeting over coffee to discuss customer concerns. What other multi-million dollar government sanctioned monopolists are willing to act with such concern and responsibility? This is how business was conducted before the invention of telecommunications and that’s just fine with me.
http://www.wutc.wa.gov/webimage.nsf/575ada997473d84588256cbf006f154f/ad275521f854481288256eb4007a541b!OpenDocument
That link provides basic information to get the ball rolling to eliminate Avista and form a PUD in Spokane County. Most Washington counties have a PUD non-profit type of structure, but not good ol’ boy corrupt Spocago. From what I’ve read so far, after some formalities concerning formation are addressed, the only barrier is a majority of signatures of county electricity rate-payers are required to move forward. One can imagine the corporate money that would be spent to confuse people into once again voting against their best interests. But that would at least be fun to watch.
I’m gonna start something on Facebook to get this going. Once the page is up I’ll post it here.
eagleproducer on December 20 at 10:03 a.m.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_178750578809791
There ya go folks, let’s get on it!
My company is even going to produce a documentary film to detail the closing of Avista and the transformation of County utilities into publicly owned entities!
Hey Avista: Good luck renting any office space in that eyesore of yours on Mission. I’m thinking low-income housing with nice views of the river, downtown and the Gonzaga campus.
arroyoribera on January 18 at 8:35 p.m.
So if my calendar is correct, it has been exactly a month since
schleufer asked Dan_at_Avista his question about bilking the Couer d’Alene Indian Nation out of 100 years of payments from Avista and then settling for 10 cents on the dollar. Dan_at_Avista disappeared and did not show his face again. Anyone surprised?
(quote from above)
schleufer on December 16 at 7:51 p.m.
ok dan here is a thought or 2. the coeur d alenes next week will get thier final settlement payment for over 100 years of the power company using thier land for water storage. the settlement equals about 10 cents on the dollar for what was actually owed. do you treat everybody that way or just indians? i have perfect credit as i pay my bills every month in full and dont use the courts and lawyers for putting off payment for a century then only pay a tiny fraction. so if its ok for your company to do that to me is it ok for me to enjoy say the next century of using the electricity and not paying the bill? maybe we can work somthing out here. ill keep using the power til the year 2110 without paying the bill and then we can discuss some sort of terms. what do ya say…how bout stop billing me til im 155 years old?
(end quote)
David Brookbank