| Commentary |
| December 27, 2009 |
| via legal alternative |
| Terasen Gas,
16705 Fraser Highway,
Surrey, B.C.,
V3S 2X7
888-224-2720 |
| R.L. Jespersen
Chief Executive Officer,
President (Terasen Inc.)
888-224-2720 |
| Tom Loski
Chief Regulatory Officer,
Terasen Inc.,
16705 Fraser Highway,
Surrey, B.C.,
V4N OE8
888-224-2720 |
| Erica M. Hamilton
B.C. Utilities Commission
Commission Secretary
(604) 660-1102
regulatory.affairs@terasengas.com |
| BC Ombudsperson
Second Floor,
756 Fort Street,
Victoria, B.C.,
fax (250) 387-0198 |
| Office of the Federal Procurement Ombudsman
Constitution Square,
340 Albert Street,
11th Floor,
Ottawa, Ontario
K1R 7Y6
Attention: Mr. Shahid Minto
(613) 947-9800 |
| Dear Sirs/Mes Dames |
| Re: Complaint against Terasen Gas. |
| Introduction: |
| I am writing with respect to our letter of November 26, 2009 acknowledged by Erica M. Hamilton, BC Utilities Commission Secretary, to her letter dated December
7, 2009 to Mr. Tom Loski, Chief Regulatory Officer of Terasen Gas Inc., and to the letter of Mr. Douglas Stout, Vice-President, Marketing and Business
Development dated December 22, 2009 and received by the writer, via courier, on December 24, 2009 |
| The primary focus of my original letter complaint related to Section 4 of the Canada Interest Act which as the Act suggests-- relates to specific notice of APR and
interest rates. |
| Ms. Hamilton's letter, to Mr. Tom Loski suggests that "Ita Robbins (sic) is disputing the way late payment charges are applied to her account." Ms. Hamilton's letter
is not a fair and accurate depiction of the letter complaint. In fact the primary complaint relates to the fact that no proper APR is provided nor designated on any of
the Terasen billings received by Ita Robbins. This is a clear breach of the prevailing federal statute relating to Interest rates. |
| Beyond this, late payment fees, which the Canada Interest Act determines as a lawful component of Interest under the Act are not properly considered under the
current billing system primarily because no proper APR is provided in the first instance. |
| *(At this time, I would NOW also question the lawful validity of Franchise fees designated with an asterisk on bills and denoted as "This fee is collected by Terasen
Gas in municipalities with franchise agreements. It is paid back to the municipality, and goes towards the cost of using streets and other property in constructing and
operating gas distribution systems"). |
| I would add under this introduction that "Fortis Inc acquired Terasen Inc. from Kinder Morgan Inc., which owned the corporation since 2005". Fortis Inc. has a
national profile which ought to further underscore the necessity of compliance with federal laws. |
| Here is an overview of Fortis's (Terasen's) "vision". |
| "Our vision is to be the world leader in those segments of the regulated utility industry in which we operate and the leading service provider within our service areas |
| In all our operations, Fortis will manage resources prudently and deliver quality service to maximize value to our customers and our shareholders. We will continue to
focus on three primary objectives: |
| Our growth in assets and market capitalization should be greater than the average of other North American public gas and electric utilities of similar size. |
| Our earnings should continue at a rate commensurate with that of a well-run North American utility. |
| The financial and business risks of Fortis should not be substantially greater than those associated with the operation of a North American utility of similar size." |
| Please note that Fortis focuses its market objectives in reference to other North American utitilities. Part of this "growth" is based on interest or penalty charges on
overdue accounts, which is also the current subject of interest rates generally from financial institutions and other as new rules, particularly in the United States relating
to interest and penalty charges becomes relevant. With all of this in mind, I have appropriately provided a copy of this communication to Canada's finance minister,
The Honourable Jim Flaherty. |
| "Overdue Accounts"--"Overdue accounts will incur a 1.5 per cent per month late payment." No proper APR is provided on any billings. |
| In his letter to Ms. Robbins dated December 22, 2009 and received by courier December 24, 2009, Mr. Douglas Stout, Vice-President, Marketing and Business
Development writes: "...the schedule of Standard Fees and Charges....includes Late Payment Charges of 1.5% or 19.56% per annum. Nowhere is it properly
stipulated that Late Payment Fees are lawfully considered as Interest charges under the federal statutue and nowhere on any bill does it stipulate that the APR is
(19.56%). A consumer might generally consider that the 1.5% per month provided for is in fact 18% per month or may not even think through the calculation
because of their busy schedules and your need to provide them with 'legal' documentation--no matter--the disclosure must be precisely as the law describes--lest
Canadian companies begin to get the accusation that they are 'a little shady'. Interest rates describe a darker context of economic endeavour--but also contemplate
much of what goes into making money in the short, middle and long economic cycles. |
| In the near future, those companies that don't properly comply will be exposed as sneaky. This will provoke further investigation--this is what happens when financial
regulation which ultimately underpins credibility of financial institutions and markets--needs a little regulatory viagra. Once you take your medicine you are more quickly
on the road to normal---and the sooner this is accomplished the better for all of us. |
| Mr. Stout also wrongly interprets the Interest Act when he writes "As indicated above, the Canada Interest Act can work in conjunction with other documents such
as the Terasen Gas Tariff" (provided under Internet). |
| My reading of the Act does not permit one rule for one disclosure and another for hard copy billings. The Act is the Act. The federal law is the federal law. Why
should it exist if it apparently cannot be enforced or simply isn't enforced? Why would Terasen be so reluctant to comply with federal law and include the APR on
the hard copy billings and other notices? I've already shown other federal institutions can't properly handle the new consumer revolution which must be properly
articulated, exhausted, amended--establishment of greater trust between Consumers----- AND---credit card companies, lending institutions, CRA, and other
companies, crown corporations, in short government or corporations (the absolute integration of corporations and government--with no oversight) AND big business
as well--to re-establish actual credibility. |
| Mr. Stout then pursues this line of circular reasoning by suggesting that the applicable federal section (4) of the Canada Interest Act has been applied by quoting the
act itself and then stating "This excerpt demonstrates that as long as the contract contains a statement of interest at the yearly rate or percentage, it is valid to charge
greater than five percent interest. In this case, the Tariff fulfills the role of the contract." |
| To begin with, the complaint itself is ignored completely by Mr. Stout, (ed: in fact he may have unintentionally affirmed the complaint). He first acknowleges the fact of the Interest Act "a statement
of interest at the yearly rate or percentage". On hard copy billings sent to Ms. Robbins this yearly rate or percentage is never provided. Moreover, Mr. Stout
misinterprets the application of the statute by stating "It is valid to charge greater than five percent interest..." The interest charge under the statute does not presume a
baseline charge of five percent--it stipulates as Mr. Stout acknowledges that if "a statement at the yearly rate or (equivalent) percentage" is not provided than any
interest charges (whether as late penalties or other) must be reduced to an annual rate of 5 percent. |
| I would add that in paragraph 2 of Mr. Stout's letter he writes "A customer service supervisor attempted to contact you on December 4, 2009 to discuss your
concerns regarding late payment charges." In fact, "Tammy" left a voice mail on that day stating that she was with Terasen "Advocacy Department". When I
telephoned "Tammy" after receiving Mr. Stout's letter of December 22, 2009 she informed me that she "had never seen nor read the letter relating to the complaint". |
| Pursuant to my telephone conversation with Erica Hamilton of December 24, 2009 she asked me the question "Mr. Robbins does your complaint relate to interest
rates or the process of handling the complaint?" My answer was/is "I am now complaining about both of these matters." This statement means that we are no further
ahead with the original complaint of November 26, 2009 and NOW have another complaint to consider as this relates to the complaint process of the BC Utilities
Commission--with a threat on the table from the company I have complained about--is there a third pillar I am sensing here--these themes are congruent! |
| On this segment of the letter I would add that Mr. Stout added that "In order for the natural gas service to remain uninterrupted, please report payment of this
overdue balance to us by January 7, 2010." The amount of overpayments we are arguing are far in excess of any amount owed. |
| By taking far too long to respond in a manner that does nothing to properly address the complaint, (and essentially pile onto it with additional threatening deadlines),
Mr. Stout has in my professional opinion now made this a political issue -- hence the enclosures. With this in mind I would ask that you consider the following web
link. |
| http://www.robbinssceresearch.com/polls/poll_654.html. |
| I might add that there are members of the Board of Directors with strong ties to the current BC Liberal government and Premier Gordon Campbell who was premier
when Terasen Gas was permitted to purchase this asset of British Columbians from BC Hydro (Gas). |
| To summarize, I file a complaint on November 26, 2009 to the BC Utilities Commission. Most academic texts on the use of a "Commission" suggest a tool of
government with significant 'high end' regulatory teeth. The evidence from this complaint describes a process where I file a complaint to the BC Utitlity Commission
on November 26, 2009 and receive contact by Terasen Advocacy who (after her call) admits that she has never even seen the complaint, which complaint is ultimately passed on to one
of the main executives of the company who (unwittingly) affirms the correctness of the complaint, provides information that clearly suggests that he does not
understand the appropriate legal application of the statute, and essentially tells the consumer to 'pound salt' all at the same time. |
| Terasen is owned by a corporation which must be aware of Canadian federal statute, and all of those statutes, when part of earnings is derived from interest charges
(knew and ought to have known) -- certainly it's provincial counterparts ought to be equally of these same matters of interest charges, - particularly at a time when
Interest rates are a fundamental consideration for budgets and other negotiations-AND as competing interests gather for market share in new emerging economies
where conventional assets find new ways of adding value to companies and shareholders. An asset is an asset--when properly valuated. If the asset purchased is
able to be constituted in another financial 'dimension' then entirely new areas of financing will take place at break neck speed. |
| My view of this complaint, properly and appropriately considered by the BC Utilities Commission, would mean that decision outcomes ought to flow back to me
from the Commission. Quite obviously, an executive with the company being complained about is going to have a bias view (captive theory) of the complaint,
particularly when billing and collections, his area as vice-president of Terasen Marketing and Business Development -- might suggest to any reasonable person--that
his outcomes will ultimately either benefit or hurt his own position. (This letter ought to suggest the benefit is short lived). He got clocked far too easily--and took his time too. |
| To wit: Mr. Stout in his letter has admitted to breaking the law/he seems unaware of its proposed operation--he further affirms is the policy of this federal gas
distribution company, which I anticipate would have the funds to be fully cognizant of the prevailing federal laws--when right now on this continent, governments are
talking about interest rates, corporate and administrative gouging that could overall -- involve hundreds of billions of dollars of consumers dollars. |
| Clearly, the companies vice-president AND a member of the Board of Directors should never have been the party to respond. This complaint has federal implications now -- because Mr. Stout and not an appropriate member of the BC Utitilies Commission-- responded. This reflects the appropriate point I percieve--that is-- de-regulation --or without a strong and appropriate oversight from oversight-- starts to ugly up the finanial environment. |
| This and the political fact that all matters of oil and gas will come under intense scrutiny as the demand from regular people to Fix The Environment--(F-TEA) but
want intense accountability---and don't want to pay any more for it--well the implications of this law as this relates to accountability with private business operating in
such a business certainly has lofty ambitions as their "vision" suggests. I suggest we are in for a rocky ride if we fail to see the total implications of interest rates, full,
plain and true disclosore etc., including this most important act relating to interest rates. Introduced into law in Canada near the time of Confederation--it had an
important purpose as this related to commerce in 1870 --- naturally the implications for better disclosure all around will be demanded. |
| I would like to see how each of you, but in particular the principles contacted respond. It will provide me with valuable insight into the nature generally of the
offices--their federal and provincial relationships-- if any, particularly when legal entities ex-provincial take control of what (in this case) was once the legal entitlement
of all British Columbians. |
| The fact that no-one in this process has even considered this potential is very disconcerting. |
| (When David Baines of the Vancouver Sun is made the Chair of BC Securities we will begin to take the final stage toward proper accountability of equity traders in
British Columbia. We will need to apply Mr. Baines expertise initially (at least) to ensure a foundation of credibility with any further more ambitious ventures in the
equity -- particular a carbon exchange--to establish credible ventures on this exchange--in the Senior Asset, and Junior Asset boards. Part of the application of the
design of this exchange at least in my mind--will relate to interest rates as part of the methodology involving the use of Assets for offset carbon purposes. Parking this
thing of beauty--as a testament to Surrey mayor and doll of all Dianne Watts--in Surrey, BC, Canada's new financial district--and right near the R.C.M.P head office,
with toughest critic of equity cheaters--and easily best investigator of private equity malfeasance et al--involved in the guts of the transition--will work because Mr.
Baines has an M.B.A. understands business, but better understands the absolute necessity of a clean game. We would want to be as big as the Dow 30 within 15
years at least---and this may be only a part of the entire market growth which is coming directly at us--but particularly good the ethics of change. The underpinning of
ethics, without being too 'ideological' about it--and a very, very Green, major entertainment district--downtown Vancouver--would advance us to the top of the
world stage in the new culture of paperless, clean societies). |
| Just as any affidavit sworn from a lawyer's office by an employee ought to have a standing of para-legal minimum, not secretary, unless secretary's in law offices are
receiving more pay these days. Short cuts make for mistakes--didn't your parents tell you about this? |
| In any event, we have to clean up our act in Order To Be the Next act--the rules to the game must tighten up--the Americans are getting hammered for regulating on
interest--but its short term. In this particular complaint I honestly believe I am providing one particular company of the importance of this---overall implications of this
for all things financial--with regulation. If you play a little loose with or are (or choose to be) ignorant of the laws, and the greater implications of these--then to me
suggests that we need to start to tighten up regulation---not choke it off--in any event, |
| from every imaginable angle this is not a good job of dealing with a complaint. To underscore the bluntness of this--I received another hard copy bill with no APR just a few days ago. Like nothing happened. (That's for context).
This is --not good- in my opinion. |
| I anticipate that the BC Utitilities Commission will accept the evidence of Terasen bills provided via legal alternative, along with this letter -- and reply within the next
72 hours in order to pre-empt Mr. Stout's threat to discontinue service. |
| per Ita Robbins
Glen P. Robbins |
| cc
Minister of Finance
The Honourable James M. Flaherty
Department of Finance Canada
140 O'Connor Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G5
Facsimile: 613-943-0938 |
