Make AEP pay now, PUCO told | The Col...

Make AEP pay now, PUCO told | The Columbus Dispatch

There are 25 comments on the Columbus Dispatch story from Apr 27, 2011, titled Make AEP pay now, PUCO told | The Columbus Dispatch. In it, Columbus Dispatch reports that:

If the choice is pay me now or pay me later, American Electric Power customers should get immediate rate relief, the Ohio Consumers' Counsel told state regulators today.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Columbus Dispatch.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Refund Now

Reynoldsburg, OH

#1 Apr 27, 2011
In my opinion refund the monies over due to the consumer and do not let the over payment sit in an escrow account, collecting interset not due deducting a small amount to each consumer who has paid their bill.
AEP charges for their service and shouldn't earn profit on taking funds that were not proper.

Since: Jan 11

Reynoldsburg, OH

#3 Apr 27, 2011
Big business strikes again, how long are citizens going to accept this? How long are we going to allow our local & state politicians to protect them? We should get this money back plus interest and penalties, just as they would demand of us!
Refund Now

Reynoldsburg, OH

#4 Apr 27, 2011
QuoteDisabledSlime wrote:
OK...AEP lawyer is a SCU*M fecal matter. If they did not act "lawfully", then that MEANS what they did was "unlawful". This is an either or not a 3rd case. You are either lawful or unlawful. If you are unlawful, that means it is "illegal". Total crap what this AEP lawyer is trying to say.
DISCLOSURE...I have always hated AEP. They charge consumers for their investments even if their consumers won't benefit from it. I hope some day AEP goes out of business, and as far as PUCO. They don't stand-up against the utilities. They are yes men. If you ever have a question or a problem, PUCO NEVER NEVER helps you. If tax payers could get back all of the taxes they pay to PUCO, it would a fairer world.
PUCO regulates phone, electric, gas, and cable. They rarely ever deny a utilities company a rate hike...why? Because they get more money from it. No incentive for them. Typical government program that has typical Union workers that back each other.
Kind of like the BBB!!!
Jim

Hilliard, OH

#5 Apr 27, 2011
Illegal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Look up illegal in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Illegal, or unlawful, is used to describe something that is prohibited or not authorized by law or, more generally, by rules specific to a particular situation (such as a game).

AEP needs to go to wikipedia or get a refund on his tuition from law school.
woman

Reynoldsburg, OH

#6 Apr 28, 2011
puco and aep are in the same bed with cloumbia gas puco is a big fat joke they are not now nor have they ever been on the side of the customers
Fred Reed

United States

#7 Apr 28, 2011
Now let me see if I got this right . A private Company illegally billed me for services retroactively but the law says I cant have my money back .
Citizenjam

Butler, OH

#8 Apr 28, 2011
AEP has displayed poor judgement and bad management for a number of years. They should refocus on serving their customers and quit playing bad politics which leads to no good end!

Since: Feb 11

Roy, WA

#9 Apr 28, 2011
We have to tell PUCO/PUKE-O what to do?

I thought they were the watchdogs for these price gouging utilities.

Must be a banner year for bribes for PUKE-O executives.
Bruno

Columbus, OH

#10 Apr 28, 2011
Why is the P.U.C.O. needed? It was there job to monitor these practices for the consumer. One step for the state to reduce unnecessary costs is to eliminate this useless monolith. They are not the consumer advocate, just a rubber stamp for the utility companies.
Mina

Hopkinsville, KY

#11 Apr 28, 2011
Just think - Kasich wants to do away with the OH Consumers' Counsel, the very people who are trying to get you, the taxpayer, some money back.

The PUCO, which Kasich supports, screwed up, and now you, the taxpayer, must pay more for your electricity.

Yet again Kasich 'shows himself' to be againt the taxpayers and for big business?

Don't you feel stupid if you voted for him? You should, you know.
SICK AND TIRED

Columbus, OH

#12 Apr 28, 2011
Too bad they put thru the smoking ban......I usually like to have a smoke after I'm bent over.
ohio lawyer

Columbus, OH

#13 Apr 28, 2011
Bruno wrote:
Why is the P.U.C.O. needed? It was there job to monitor these practices for the consumer. One step for the state to reduce unnecessary costs is to eliminate this useless monolith. They are not the consumer advocate, just a rubber stamp for the utility companies.
Some kind of agency is needed when you have a monopoly, and most utilities are going to be monopolies -- how many electric lines are we going to run? With no agency and no competition... you would not like the result. Although I agree that the PUCO is too much of a rubber stamp.
just saying

Mount Hope, OH

#14 Apr 28, 2011
I hope the gasoline companies are next.
Citizen for many years

Columbus, OH

#15 Apr 28, 2011
These guys who stop buy to collect their donations with their little clipboard really do heir job.
Ohio Patriot

Thornville, OH

#16 Apr 28, 2011
This sad incident demonstrates how the PUCO - under cover of both political parties - is just a 'yes-man' to Ohio's powerful utility lobbies. This has been a fact of life in Ohio since the 1990's. Now that Kasich has decimated the Consumers' Counsel by slashing its budget in two, the power of the utilities will be virtually unchallenged.

Ohio has turned into a Tea Party nightmare where corporations rule and citizens struggle just to get by. I hope my fellow Ohio Patriots are willing to work hard and work together to turn this situation around. The times are dire.
Hilliard resident

Columbus, OH

#17 Apr 28, 2011
So the Ohio law permits neither retroactive rate increases nor refunds for previous increases, and the $63 million cannot be recovered from AEP. The real issue is that the PUCO previously, and quite erroneously, permitted the implementation of a retroactive rate increase in the first place. At best, the PUCO was negligent in their conduct, and at worst, they may have knowingly allowed an inappropriate increase, which would be tantamount to perpetrating FRAUD on residents of the State of Ohio. In this case, I would ask "To what purpose"? The PUCO should be liable for refunding the $63M to the affected customers. In addition, there should be a thorough investigation by the Ohio Inspector General to determine just what form of conduct occurred. If it was negligence, there is quite clearly a competence issue within this agency and appropriate disciplinary action should be taken. If it extends beyond negligence, then appropriate charges should be brought against anyone involved, be they at the PUCO or at AEP!
fiery buddha

Columbus, OH

#18 Apr 28, 2011
YAY!
Just Sayin

Columbus, OH

#19 Apr 28, 2011
Does anyone actually read up on the issue before spouting off? It would not appear so. It sounds like AEP applied for a rate increase to start in January. Due to procedural delays, the modified increase wasn't approved until March. Since it was not their fault, the PUCO did not penalize them for the delay and allowed them to collect the amounts they would have recieved (and you would have paid) had things gone as planned.

The courts ruled that this is a retroactive increase. It is a matter of examining an action and interpreting how the law applies to that action, not mecessarkly negligence or fraud. It is how our system works. Otherwise, every decision ever made by a judge in a court case that was overturned would result in the charging of negligence or fraud.

People love to talk, talk, talk and act like they know something.
Pay up AEP

Frisco, TX

#20 Apr 28, 2011
If the shoe was on the other foot, then AEP would demand their money now or face disconnection. AEP by the same token, you owe it to consumers to return money that does not belong to you. All you are, are a bunch of corporate crooks and swines.

Since: Jun 10

Canal Winchester, OH

#21 Apr 28, 2011
Don't look now, but there are plans to merge the Consumer's Council with PUCO. The utilities and the governor encourage that. So said the Dispatch last week.
No conflict of interest here, is there?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

American Electric Power Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Pioneer Investments Adds to Stakes in Hartford ... (Nov '15) Nov '15 Connie lake luzer... 1
www.solarsteampower.com the most annoying dumb ... (Sep '15) Sep '15 This will make yo... 1
News Clean power plan could result in less coal use;... (Mar '15) Mar '15 Solar miner 09er 1
News Utilities feel burned by solar-energy users (Nov '14) Nov '14 Solarman 36
News Utility bills more costly in wake of polar vortex (Feb '14) Feb '14 Jerry K 27
News Logan teen charged in AEP transformer vandalism (Nov '09) Feb '14 Love AEP 41
News AEP outage information now available online (Dec '13) Dec '13 RUTH LOWE 1
More from around the web