1) Attached is a letter a member received from the Auditor General in response to his letter asking for a full and complete audit like that done by the Ontario AG.
Hopefully her commitment is sincere and that with our help this rogue government and corporation can be held to account. Please keep sending your suggestions, information and complaints to the Auditor General. This office is supposed to be completely independent, one that is not subject to the government’s pressure. She needs to hear about the harassment, the threats, the cutting of power over $65. This isn’t how our once-crown jewel of a corporation is supposed to be run.
2) The Port Angeles smart meter group, that successfully fought off smeters, is now involved with the US Naval exercises proposed to begin next year. If you wish to keep informed, here is the website http://www.smartawareness.org/about.php
3) This industry report says that the road that the $meter programs are on has been rocky, in Canada due largely to taking the first technology offered that has proven to have shortcomings. BC Hydro was one of the very first major programs for ITRON – ITRON bragged about this major program. BCUC had turned down Fortis’s application in 2008 for the same program, same meter due to lack of benefits and said the technology was too new and unproven – sure to need expensive upgrades. How right they were. And that is why they were banned from any oversight for Hydro’s program. The liberal govt wanted no one to interfere with this program even if it were too early, too expensive, too dangerous.
4) People in Tennessee concerned about privacy, and Vermont group warns it can’t be too careful.
“Allen Gilbert, executive director of ACLU Vermont, said his organization is struggling to limit access to the records by police and third parties.
“The technology is fascinating and attractive, but the public can be turned off of it if they think information about them and what they do in their home is not being protected adequately,” Gilbert said.
At issue is what can be done with such data. Law enforcement routinely has subpoenaed such information, sometimes to determine whether a person has been at home at a particular time and sometimes to demonstrate homes are being used for power-intensive crimes, such as growing marijuana.
5) In Michigan $$mart water meters resulted in many people getting huge bills and now having to fight for a refund.
6) New York Times failed to report on conflicts of interest in articles about safety of EMF from powerlines.
7) More and more people are becoming aware of the many problems with the smeters and the grid. The momentum is building, and this is great. Remember when we felt all alone? We may be leading the pack and we are far from alone!
From a member to the BCUC:
Sent: December 21, 2014 4:40 PM
Subject: B.C.hydro fraud
B.C. hydro is charging the so called “failed installation fee” without providing any proof that such an event took place.
This is fraud.
B.C.hydro must be required, at minimum, to leave a notice at the residence as some evidence of a visit by an installer.
Due to many instances of lies and deception by B.C. Hydro many people have restricted access to the meter
for removal without an appointment. Also federal regulations state that the main breaker must be turned off
in the residence before changing the meter, which B.C. Hydro has violated many hundreds of thousands of times.
The only recourse people have is to require an appointment which in my case I gave notice twice in May of 2014 plus a sign at the meter.
People that refuse to pay the extortion fees are having their well being and potentially their lives threatened by disconnection of service in winter.
B.C. Hydro has utter contempt for a large number of customers and is continuously proving this with punitive fees.
Any normal business would have withered long ago by abusing customers this way.
Please explain how the BCUC will rectify these violations.
Thank you for your time,
Sent: December 23, 2014 5:42 PM
To: Greg Reimer; Customer Relations; Dennis and Sharon Noble; John Horgan, MLA; Kathy Corrigan, MLA; Adrian Dix, MLA; Mike Farnworth, MLA; Patrick Wruck; Commission Secretary; Elizabeth May; Bill Good; Lynda Steele; Andrew Weaver
Cc: Citizens for Safe Technology Society; Christy Clark; Bill Bennett
Subject: Legacy Meter Extortion Fee PLUS Failed Installation Charge
In this email you will find a letter I mailed to Daren Sanders, Senior Manager, Customer Services Operation. With that letter I enclosed payment for the Legacy Meter Extortion Fee and the Failed Installation Charge only to protect us from having our credit rating compromised or our power disconnected.
December 21, 2014
PO Box 9501
Re: Account Number: xxxxxxxxxx211
Service at: xxxxx xxxxxxxx Street, Burnaby, BC
Attention: Daren Sanders. Senior Manager, Customer Service Operations
Enclosed please find sixty-five (65) cheques for payments for the Legacy Meter Extortion Fees and the Failed Installation Charges which are being paid under protest because BC Hydro disregards our long-standing concerns that $MART METERS affect our health, privacy, security, and safety and the BC Liberal government have forced these dangerous RF emitting meters on the public of our province by taking away the power of the BCUC, a regulatory body of the BC Government, with the legislation of the Clean Energy Act. This was disingenuous and extremely disrespectful of the citizens of this province and seems like a wilful abuse of power.
Please examine the backside of the cheques as the amount of each one is referenced to the particular invoice number to which each payment should be applied. All electricity used for the year had been paid in full as of December 8, 2014.
These cheques total $434.07 represents the amount we have been billed for the Legacy Meter Charge plus GST from December 1, 2013 to November 2014, our anniversary date for equal payments PLUS the amount of $65.00 plus GST for a Failed Meter Installation Charge.
There is a note on our latest invoice #116007664243 with a billing date of November 25, 2014, stating that our next meter reading will be on or about Jan 20. This informs us that our meter will not be read for our scheduled December 25, 2014 bill. So, BC Hydro states in writing that we are being charged monthly for a service that is not provided. If the meter is not going to be read monthly then we should not be charged every month for meter reading. I have never seen a meter reader come into our yard to read our analog meter.
I do not believe anyone is physically visiting our house to read our analog meter every month but what I do believe is that the amount of our daily average kWh use is being multiplied by the number of days between billing periods and then simply added to each month’s estimated meter reading numbers that is printed on our invoice. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out.
I think it would be a good idea for the meter reader to leave a calling card the next time they read our meter. This would be the least you could do to help restore a slight level of trust which no longer exists between the customer and BC Hydro. We have no proof if or when our meter was read but must pay the discriminatory legacy fees each month.
The fees are law under the Tariff, but the law (the Utilities Commission Act) also says that people must be charged the same rate for the same service. BC Hydro is reading smart meters and not charging for this service.
The legacy fees being charged are discriminatory and illegal according to the Utilities Commission Act. The UCA section 39 stipulates that there must not be discrimination with regard to service or to rates for that service.
Please justify why this illegal discriminatory practice continues. The courtesy of a reply is expected.
Greg Reimer firstname.lastname@example.org
Customer Relations email@example.com
Dennis and Sharon Noble firstname.lastname@example.org
John Horgan, Leader NDP email@example.com
Kathy Corrigan, Kathy.Corrigan.MLA@leg.bc.ca
Adrian Dix firstname.lastname@example.org
Mike Farnworth email@example.com
Patrick Wruck firstname.lastname@example.org
Commission Secretary email@example.com
Elizabeth May firstname.lastname@example.org
Bill Good email@example.com
Linda Steele firstname.lastname@example.org
Andrew Weaver email@example.com