Just wrapped up a case where MLGW had a commercial client on a 33-day billing cycle for 8 months straight. Standard cycle should be 30 days per their tariff Schedule GS-3. The extended periods caused demand charges to compound - we're looking at $2,847 in overcharges just from the billing period errors alone. Anyone else seen MLGW doing this? Their meter reading department claims it's due to "route optimization" but that doesn't excuse the billing errors.
MLGW 33-day billing cycle nightmare - $2,847 overcharge
Reggie, we had something similar with Eversource here in CT last year. They kept extending cycles to 35-36 days and claiming operational necessity. The key is demanding they pro-rate the demand charges properly. Did they at least adjust the kW demand calculation for the longer period?
Vince, that's exactly the problem - they didn't pro-rate anything! Just applied the full demand charge as if it was a standard 30-day period. I've got the tariff language that clearly states billing periods over 32 days require pro-ration of demand charges. MLGW's response was basically "oops, our bad" but now they're dragging their feet on the refund.
This is classic utility foot-dragging. File a formal complaint with the Tennessee Regulatory Authority if you haven't already. We had success with Westar Energy in Kansas using this approach - took 4 months but got full refund plus interest. The threat of regulatory involvement usually speeds things up considerably.
Bonnie's right about regulatory pressure. Also check if MLGW has any published service standards about billing cycle consistency. SMUD here in Sacramento has to maintain cycles within +/- 2 days of standard or they automatically trigger pro-ration. Might be worth asking if MLGW has similar policies they're not following.
Good advice all around. Filed the TRA complaint yesterday and also discovered MLGW's own billing manual requires notification to customers when cycles exceed 32 days. They never sent any notices. This is looking more and more like systematic billing problems rather than isolated incidents.
Reggie, if you're finding systematic issues, you might want to pull billing data for other customers on the same route. Ameren Missouri got hit with a class action a few years back for similar billing period manipulation. The settlement was in the millions because they found hundreds of affected accounts.
Update: MLGW agreed to full refund of $2,847 plus 6% interest after the TRA inquiry. They're also reviewing their meter reading procedures. Pam, you're absolutely right about checking other accounts - found 3 more clients with similar issues. Sometimes you have to push hard to get results.