Manny from Miami. Found a case where the utility was applying a 13-month ratchet lookback when the tariff clearly specifies 11 months. Not a dramatic difference per billing period but over three years of applying the wrong lookback the client was billed on artificially elevated demand floors for 24 extra months. Has anyone found errors in the ratchet lookback period specifically?
Ratchet clause — utility applied wrong lookback period
Walt from Pittsburgh. Yes and this is a clean dispute because the tariff language is typically unambiguous about the lookback period. Either it says 11 months or it does not.
Mike D. The recovery calculation is also straightforward. Identify the months where the billing demand was set by the erroneous 13th month look back and recalculate what it should have been under the correct 11-month window.
The utility initially claimed their billing system had always used 13 months and that a tariff revision in 2009 changed it to 11 but the billing system was never updated. They accepted the dispute once I showed them the tariff language.
Terry. A billing system that was never updated to match a tariff revision is a meaningful finding. Worth checking whether other accounts in that territory were affected the same way.
Good point. The utility said they would audit the affected rate class. If they find other accounts that is good for the industry even if I do not benefit directly.