20020805Petition for Reconsideration.pdf

")00 /PETITION FOR RE ISIDERATION Page l
Jean Jewell '
From:RALPH STUART [[e-mail]]
Sent:Monday,August 05,2002 9:16 AM
To:Jean Jewell
Subject:RE:Your Formal Complaint -Case No.IPC-E-02-5,Order No.29082
I received the final order in the mail on 8/3.&NBS;I hereby petition for reconsiderationin that I do not
feel that my "testimony"was duly considered.&NBS;If there is a specific format in which a petition for
reconsiderationmust be delivered,please advise.
There are a couple of items that are arguable,but there are several that must be reconsidered due to what
could be considered unfair and/or unethical business practices.
My counter to the five points addressed in the decision are as follows:
1.This point is arguable in terms of reasonable responsiveness.However the commission's findings
that Idaho Power was slow in in replacing the meter should speak to the subject of assumption of fullliabilityonthepartofofIdahoPower,paricularlywhen their own service technician considered the
meter operable without a thorough investigation.I never received an analysis of the meter functioning,but I would venture that it was a defective coil which failed to make proper contact,and is probably the
most common meter defect.
2.With respect to account confidetiality,it is unethical to interview another member of the household
over the telephone other than the plaintiff.The fact is,if my wife were to request information on the
account,she would be denied due to the fact that she is not the customer of record.I feel that Mr.lulloff
was on a "fishing trip",and would have interviewed my 9 year old daughter if he felt that it would have
supported Idaho Power's case.Why did not Mr.Lulloff contact me;the customer and plaintiff?
3.With respest to notification of meter replacement,responsibility is arguable.Even though there is norule,good business practices would warrant consumer notification.
4.Regarding recalculated billings,I feel that rule 204 is vague,and can be applied arbitrarily.I do notfeelthatmyassertionsweredulyconsidered.
5.With respect to notification of consumer rights,at no time in the re-billing process was I notified of
my rights as per rule 204.I consider this a serious violation.Again,the rule does not specifiy thatnotificationhastobegiven"only if the customer complains".It is very specific,with no exceptions.
I hereby request a formal hearing.I am prepared to pursue all legal avenues in order to have my case
heard,and a full and impartial decision rendered.
Do You Yahoo!?
8/5/2002