20020909_263.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER SMITH
CO MMISSI 0 NER HANSEN
JEAN JEWELL
RANDY LOBB
DON HOWELL
BEVERL Y BARKER
RON LAW
GENE FADNESS
TONY A CLARK
WORKING FILE
FROM:DANIEL KLEIN
DATE:SEPTEMBER 6, 2002
RE:FORMAL COMPLAINT OF MARY BURKE
On August 29 2002, the Commission received a "formal" complaint from Ms. Mary
Burke against Idaho Power. Ms. Burke is requesting that an alleged past due amount of $323 .
for service at Tee Avenue between January 18, 2002 to March 25 2002, be removed from her
current account. The amount in dispute was transferred from a prior account.
BACKGROUND
On January 10, 2002, Mary Burke maintains that she contacted Idaho Power to
disconnect service at 3644 Tee Avenue, Boise. Ms. Burke received a bill from Idaho Power in
February, which she assumed was a final bill for the 3644 Tee Avenue address. This bill was
never paid. Ms. Burke also received a bill in March for the 3644 Tee Avenue. This bill also was
not paid. On March 25 2002, Mary Burke contacted Idaho Power to establish service at 1344
W. Crestwood Dr., Meridian, beginning Aprill , 2002. During this contact, Idaho Power verified
that Ms. Burke wanted her service at 3644 Tee Avenue, Boise disconnected. Ms. Burke s April
bill reflected the unpaid balance carried forward from the Tee address, with the associated late
payment charge, along with billing for service provided to her new address.
DECISION MEMORANDUM SEPTEMBER 6, 2002
Idaho Power maintains that there is no record of Ms. Burke contacting the Company
about the disputed billing or placing an order to disconnect service prior to March 25. The
Company is not contesting the claim that Ms. Burke vacated her home on Tee and had it up for
sale during the time period in question. Without an order for disconnection, however, the
Company had no reason to believe that Ms. Burke would not be responsible for the bills.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Ms. Burke has provided information that indicates she vacated the Tee address sometime
in January 2002. Ms. Burke has not provided evidence that she ordered disconnection of service
on January 10, 2002. At Ms. Burke request, Staff contacted Qwest to inquire about her
telephone service order activity. Ms. Burke did contact Qwest on January 3 2002 to have
service moved to 2663 Westland Place, Boise on January 9 2002, and disconnected at the Tee
address January 20 2002. She contacted Qwest again on January 8 2002 to update the transfer
to the new address for January 16, 2002, and the disconnection at the Tee address on January 11
2002. The fact that Ms. Burke transferred telephone service to another address does not prove
that she requested Idaho Power to disconnect her service. The Company has no record of her
requesting that bills be sent to any address other then the Tee or Crestwood addresses. Typically,
ifthe Company receives an order for disconnection without a corresponding request for
connection at a new address, which would have been the case with Ms. Burke in January, the
customer s account is noted so that the final bill would reach the customer rather than simply go
to the customer s previous address. Furthermore, it is not unusual for customers selling homes to
disconnect all utility services except electricity or gas, particularly during the winter when both
heat and light would be needed. In reviewing the complaint record, Staff could not find any
justification for reversing Idaho Power s decision to hold Ms. Burke responsible for the billing in
question.
The parties have attempted to reach an agreement informally and have been unable to do
so. Given this impasse, Staff recommends that a summons be issued requiring Idaho Power to
answer the complaint.
DECISION MEMORANDUM SEPTEMBER 6, 2002
COMMISSION DECISION
The Commission s procedural Rule 24 allows a disgruntled party to formally file a
complaint. IDAPA 31.01.01.024. Should the Commission issue a summons to Idaho Power?
How does the Commission wish to proceed?
BJ~
Daniel Klein
j:dmemos/fc of mary burke
DECISION MEMORANDUM SEPTEMBER 6, 2002