|
"Those who say it cannot be done should not interfere with those of us who are doing it"© - S. Hickman
| Home Against the Grain Livid Leigh Boilin' Ed D. Tom The Informer Knowledge is Freedom Privacy Links Court Case Contact Us |
© 1994 - 2007
|
Court Case of Importance
|
7055
Mountain Rd Concerning the PUC Dear members,
c/o
7055 Mountain Rd Dear Sir; I got my July phone bill and saw it had a rate increase on my service charge that went from 11.43 to 12.25. This is used for maintenance of lines. Then I saw a new charge on there called Wireless portability number. I did not understand this, since the Number portability charge was eliminated in February of this year. So I called Sprint and asked why the wireless charge when I had no wireless phone? The response was that it was put on to recoup their costs to maintain the lines whether I had wireless or not. Hey, it said specifically wireless, not hard line, I said. He said, "it should have read hardline also." I said I disagree, it said wireless, not hardline maintenance. Now why did the PUC allow double dipping into my pockets? Did you know that Sprint was going to do this? You are to protect the consumer and not the phone companies. They raised their hard line service, which offsets their costs and then you let them coerce you into again charging me to "recoup their losses" by adding another charge thereby making me pay twice for their alleged line maintenance? There is definitely something wrong with your "agency" practices. Please explain why you allowed this Rate increase and what can be done to correct this gouging of the people in North Carolina? WHEN was the PUBLIC HEARING on this rate increase held? Just whose side are you on anyway? I suspect I know from past experiences in dealing with you , your answer. Please show me I am wrong, and that you really do represent the "peoples" interests? Sincerely
cc Russ Capps
Sirs, I then received a response from Public Utilities Commission that was not of my liking at all and here is the response, to me, from the PUC. NORTH CAROLINA PUBLIC STAFF UTILITIES COMMISSION Mr. Marcus Hill, Manager Dear Mr. Hill: Attached is a copy of a letter we received from Mr. Albert Coombs, 7055 Mountain Road, Oxford, North Carolina 27565-7730. Please investigate this situation and provide us with a detailed report of your findings. The report should contain all relevant information you are able to provide concerning this matter. If you are unable to provide the requested report (an original and one copy) by August 21, 2004, please call 919/733-9277 or email psconsumer.mail@ncmail.net to request an extension. Siricerely, / Rhoda Torres, Complaint Analyst RT/im Mr. Albert Coombs Executive Director Communications
EconomicResearch Legal
Transportation
4326 Mail Service Center. Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4326 . Fax (919) 733-9565 An Equal Opportunity I Affirmative Action Employer
PUC is asking Sprint to investigate? Come on gentlemen I am a professional researcher of 40 years and did not just get off the turnip boat yesterday to see what is very obvious that PUC hasn't the mentality in the whole bunch of them to investigate the matter and give me a response to my simple letter. They are grossly incompetent and you fund them with taxpayers' dollars to do a job and it is obvious they are woefully lacking in performing that job. Had there been a Rate hearing on this issue PUC would have told me the date and time and advised me that indeed they gave permission for the rate hike on line maintenance and also gave authority to charge another charge for the same service of line maintenance like the Sprint rep told me only hiding it in a wireless phone charge when I don't have a wireless phone and millions of their customers don't either. The PUC did not tell me any such thing and had no answer. Are you too in a collusion to rip off the people by allowing the phone companies to dictate what they want when they want? Is it this committee's position that Sprint has Cart Blanche and can set the rate however they want and PUC just goes along and that is the reason PUC is telling Sprint to investigate the matter? Sprint and other phone companies are already receiving a rate of return in
the 22 percent category where all other corporations in North Carolina are struggling
to get 12 percent rate of return and most are in the 8 to 10 percent category. There is no need to contact Commissioner of PUC, Jo Ann Sanford, as she lied to the Committee at the special hearing held on the previous matter. She told the special hearing committee, that I and Paul Burge attended, when they asked the question of jurisdiction, that the PUC had no jurisdiction. They did and we have that in writing and the federal statutes that said PUC does have jurisdiction so she snowballed the committee on that so I don't expect a straight (truthful) answer from her on this matter either. Now the question is, now that I caught PUC with their pants down, what are you going to do to roll back these charges and deny Sprint their gouging of the people? What are you going to do about the total ineptness of the useless PUC when they haven't the intelligence to answer a simple letter and only turn the matter over to the fox, Sprint, that raided the hen house (people of North Carolina) to ask them what is going on? This is fraud upon the people and corruptness par excellence by the corporate State of North Carolina. Is it possible to get an intelligent answer from you committee members, not like I got from the PUC?
Albert Coombs
Joint Legislative Utility Review Committee Senate Appointments House Appointments Public Utilities |
\