Readers could have seen your ad here when reading this story. Email retailenergyx@gmail.com
       Events        Jobs        Contact        Migration Stats        Supplier Lists        Municipal Aggregation


RESA Notes Disparate Language Regarding New York Enrollment Verifications in UBPs

June 14,2018



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

Tags:
New York  

Comment on this story


ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com
Business-Development-Manager -- Retail Supplier -- Texas - Houston
Business-Development-Manager -- Agent, Broker, Consultant -- New Jersey
Energy-Sales-Broker -- Agent, Broker, Consultant -- Pennsylvania
Retail-Energy-Channel-Manager -- Retail Supplier -- New York
Chief-Operating-Officer -- Retail Supplier -- New York


More Stories on RetailEnergyX.com:
New York Muni Aggregator MEGA Makes Pitch To Village
New York DPS Schedules Working Group Meeting On Energy Storage, DER Integration
New York ALJs Agree Certain Utilities Did Not Conform To Protective Order In Retail Reset Proceeding
ESCO Alleges NY Utilities Failed To Comply With Protective Order Process In Retail Market Proceeding
Retail Supplier Parent Selling New York Power Plants


comments powered by Disqus







Advertise here:
Email retailenergyx@gmail.com


Events Jobs Contact Migration Stats Supplier Lists Municipal Aggregation

About Disclaimer Privacy Terms of Service

Home


Developed by: Avidweb Technologies inc.