Unhappy with Palmco
Thank you for the June 19 article "Energy market lacks power." It was very informative. Unfortunately, it came too late to prevent what happened to me.
I accepted an offer from Palmco Power PA LLC, for a rate of 6.49 cents per kilowatt-hour. Before switching to Palmco in March, I was with Allegheny Power at a rate of 6.81 cents/kwh.
This rate appeared on my electric bill for three months, lulling me into believing that all was well. At no time was I told in writing or by phone this was a "variable" rate.
In May, Palmco went to 10.23 cents. That's when I discovered the variable rate that went up.
So I canceled Palmco and called West Penn Power, which told me it would take 30 days for the change. I got my last Palmco bill and the rate had risen to 15.5 cents -- more than double the rate from February.
After a long telephone call with delays on hold, I finally asked who would be the appropriate person to accept service from my upcoming lawsuit. There was a sudden change in tone from obnoxious to "What will make you happy?" I bit my tongue to keep from saying, "To see you and your company out of business."
Palmco offered a small refund, but I threatened to sue unless I received a full refund of everything I paid in excess of the original rate.
They agreed, but I haven't received my refund yet. If I don't see it soon, I will sue.
David M. Check
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Four downs: Steelers might still be Adams’ best bet
- NFL notebook: Seahawks activate cornerback Lane
- Central Catholic wins 5th WPIAL football title
- Michigan State humbles Penn State in finale
- Offense continues to click as Panthers hold off Kent State, 85-76
- Penguins’ Johnston agrees with Dubinsky suspension
- Exhibits celebrate Pittsburgh artist Haskell’s works
- Road Trip! Destination: Bardstown, Ky.
- Steelers remain cautious of Seattle QB Wilson on ground, through air
- Steelers notebook: Brown downplays possible matchup against Seahawks’ Sherman
- Clairton captures 12th WPIAL football championship