RESA Notes Disparate Language Regarding New York Enrollment Verifications in UBPs
In comments in support of a rehearing request seeking changes to the recently revised Uniform Business Practices in New York, the Retail Energy Supply Association noted, as EnergyChoiceMatters.com had done in reporting on the changes when first proposed (see story here), that the UBPs contain disparate language regarding the verification of enrollments
RESA noted that the UBP amendments provide that, "In addition to the requirements in UBP Section 5.B.1., for any sale to a residential and small nonresidential customer resulting from: 1) door-to-door solicitation; 2) telephonic marketing; or 3) scheduled appointment, each enrollment is only valid with an independent third party verification."
However, RESA noted that the term "voice-recorded verification" is used in other parts of the UBP, rather than "independent third party verification"
"[T]he use of the phrase 'independent third party verification' in some instances in the UBP and the use of the phrase 'voice-recorded verification' in other instances in the UBP has the potential to create confusion because it is not clear if the two words are intended to have the same or different meanings. According to Section 5, Attachment 1, a 'voice-recorded verification is required to enter into a telephonic agreement, or a door to door agreement, or agreement that resulted from an appointment with a residential and small nonresidential customer to initiate service and begin enrollment.' Further, '[u]se of either an Independent Third Party or an Integrated Voice Response system to obtain customer authorization is required for any telephone solicitation or sales resulting from door-to-door marketing or appointment.' However, in other sections of the UBP, there is only a reference to 'an independent third party verification.' Thus, it is unclear whether the use of an Independent Third Party and IVR are both acceptable methods of obtaining verification in all instances. Accordingly, RESA requests that the Commission clarify this issue by modifying the UBP to use consistent terminology throughout," RESA said
RESA's comments also addressed other issues previously raised by ESCOs concerning the UBP changes throughout the proceeding. See RESA's comments here