Major Energy Deceptive Variable Rates for Electricity Class Action

When consumers switch from a regulated utility to an energy services company (ESCO), they are seeking better prices, since there is no difference at all in the quality of electricity or gas the different companies deliver. The complaint for this class action brings suit against an ESCO, Major Energy Electric Services, LLC, alleging that it has engaged in deceptive marketing and price gouging.

The class for this action is defined as a class and/or a group of classes:

• The Multistate Class is all Major Energy customers, including customers of companies that Major is a successor to, in the US, who were charged a variable rate for electricity or gas by Major, during the applicable statute of limitations period through the date of judgement in this case.
• The State Classes are all Major Energy customers in individual states (such as New York and Maryland), including customers of companies that Major is a successor to, who were charged a variable rate for electricity or gas by Major, during the applicable statute of limitations period through the date of judgement in this case.

In previous times, energy for homes was supplied by heavily-regulated utility companies, like Con Edison in New York. In the 1990s, state energy markets were deregulated and other non-utility companies were allowed to set themselves up as suppliers of energy.

However, the complaint alleges that “Major Energy has taken advantage of the lack of regulatory oversight by engaging in price gouging and deceptive and unlawful marketing practices designed to profiteer at the expense of the consuming public.”

The plaintiff in this case, Angela Glikin, lives in Maryland. In 2013, she changed her electrical service to Entrust Energy. The plan she signed up for began as a fixed-rate plan which later changed to a variable-rate one. The agreement specified that it could be assigned to another supplier.

Entrust eventually assigned it to National Gas & Electric, who assigned it to Major Energy in 2018. The complaint quotes the letter she received from Major as saying, “The Major Energy team’s experience in deregulated energy markets enables them to offer competitive prices…”

However, the complaint alleges, “Major Energy’s rates were not ‘competitive’ in any sense of the word.” The complaint claims, “Among other unsettling characteristics, Major Energy’s rates were higher than [Glikin’s] local utility rates 100% of the time. In fact, Major Energy’s rates were always at least double the rate [Glikin’s] utility charged for the exact same energy.”

The complaint also claims, “The average variable rate Major Energy charged [Glikin] in 2018 … was 92.42% higher than the average rate among Major Energy’s primary Maryland ESCO competitors in 2018…”

According to the complaint, Major’s rates “were untethered to market conditions and thus Major Energy breached the Agreement with” Glikin and other customers.

The counts include breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, among other things.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer
Tags: Deceptive Advertising, Energy, Variable Rates