Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Late Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PSC considers stepped late‑fee schedule for dual billing; suppliers push for a simple 5% cap
Summary
Staff proposed late‑fee regulations for dual billing that mirror utility rules with a 20‑day grace period and phased increases up to 5%. Supplier representatives urged a simpler single cap and clearer language about whether late fees apply to the bill total less taxes; staff recommended removing the word 'net' and asked for further drafting.
The Public Service Commission considered proposed regulations to govern late fees for residential customers receiving dual bills from competitive suppliers.
Staff presented a proposal that would mirror utility late‑fee protections: customers would have a 20‑day period before any late fee could be charged, and late fees would increase in steps (for example, 1.5% then an additional 1.5% then 2%), up to a 5% cap. Staff said the phased approach preserves familiar consumer protections and a graduated response to nonpayment.
Retail suppliers and their trade association urged a simpler approach. RISA proposed striking the complex interim steps and adopting a straightforward cap — "a supplier may not charge a late fee in excess of 5%" — arguing the supplier consolidated billing context uses a simpler cap and that dual‑billing should be administrable and predictable for suppliers and customers.
Stakeholders also sought clarification of the late‑fee base. Staff said late fees should apply to the bill total less applicable taxes (for example, gross receipts tax), and suggested dropping the term "net" to avoid confusion. Parties discussed whether environmental surcharges and other levies would appear on the supplier bill or the utility bill and whether suppliers remain liable for taxes even when customers do not pay; staff noted tax obligations generally remain and specifics will need drafting.
Outcome: Commissioners asked staff to incorporate stakeholder input into a clearer draft (including potential removal of the word "net"), to confirm current utility practice with respect to tax treatment, and to return with revised regulatory language; no final rule was adopted at the session.
