Electronic Service Only

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Electronic Service Only"

Jeremy Lambert
5 years ago
Views:

1 December 1,2015 Electronic Service Only James E. Davis Stratton Street Logan, WV Robert Hicks Fast Action Towing and Recovery PO Box 415 Man, WV RE: Case No MC-FC James E. Davis v. Robert L. Hicks, dba Fast Action Towing and Recovery Gentlemen: Staff Memorandum issued today was served via on the above-listed parties. If you wish to respond to Staff Memorandum, you may do so in writing, within 10 days, unless directed otherwise, of this date. You will not receive a copy of the Staff Memorandum by regular mail. Your failure to respond in writing to the utility s answer, Staffs recommendations, or other documents may result in a decision in your case based on your original filing and the other documents in the case file, without further hearing or notice. When you provide an address you will automatically receive electronic docket notifications as documents are filed in this proceeding. The notifications allow recipients to view a document within an hour from the time the filing is processed. If you have not done so, you are requested to file the Electronic Mail Agreement, previously mail to you, which allows the Commission to serve all issued in this matter via electronic docket notification. Please note - the Public Service Commission does not accept electronic filings. Therefore, if you wish to respond to the Staff Mer~orandum you must do so in writing submitted to the Executivz Secretary s Office at the above address. Sincerely, IF1jn Enc. Memo ;.&&JLL&J 4;- Ingri~$~ll, Director Executive Secretary Division

2 FINAL JOINT STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: INGRID FERRELL Executive Secretary FROM: RONALD E. ROBERTSON, JR. /% Staff Attorney DATE: December 1,2015 SUBJECT: CASE NO MC-FC JAMES E. DAVIS V. ROBERT L. HICKS, DBA FAST ACTION TOWING AN RECOVERY Based upon our investigation, Staff has the following statements and/or recommendations: 1. Staff has had no contact with the Complainant during the complaint process. 2. Robert L. Hicks, dba Fast Action Towing and Recovery (Fast) has issued a refund check in the amount of $70.00 to the Complainant and that check was sent certified mail to the Complainant in order to resolve this complaint. This $70.00 refund check is an amount greater than the amount that Staff would recommend in this case. 3. Staff recommends that Fast be reminded that each invoice should include all information required by the Commission s Motor Carrier Rule 5.2.e. 4. Staff recommends that Fast also be reminded that no charges should be made for services not included in Statewide Maximum Tariff unless Fast has received Commission approval through M.C. Tariff Form No Staff recommends that this case be dismissed. On September 2, 2015, James E. Davis (Complainant) filed a complaint against Fast. The Complainant states that he was overcharged. The Complainant also filed a copy of the invoice. On September 14, 2015, Fast filed its answer. Fast stated that it feels the charges the Complainant received were more than fair and Fast tried to accommodate the Complainant. Fast is currently operating from a Commission-approved tariff effective October from Case No MC-TOW.

3 Case No E-C December 1,2015 Page 2 On November 5, 2015, Fast filed a letter along with a copy of a $70.00 check payable to James E. Davis in order to resolve the complaint case. Attached is the internal memorandum of Jennifer Moore, Utility Analyst I, Utilities Division, that provides her final investigation of the complaint case. Based on the Utilities Division s review of the invoice compared to Fast s Commission approved tariff, the total charges should be $ that shows Fast overcharged by $ The $ breakdown is as follows: Towing Charge $ Storage $ Second Tow $ Ms. Moore s memorandum states that Fast submitted a copy of a letter along with a copy of a check in the amount of $70.00 that was issued to Complainant and filed with the Commission on November 5, The letter states that Fast has tried on numerous occasions to contact Complainant, but has been unable to reach him. The letter further states that in order to resolve this matter a check in the amount of $70.00 is enclosed and by cashing the enclosed check, the Complainant is agreeing to the resolution. Ms. Moore has also tried on multiple occasions to contact the Complainant by leaving messages with a female individual and on voice mail, but have not had any return calls. Ms. Moore s memorandum further stated that Fast submitted to Utility Staff a copy of a certified mail return card that shows Complainant signed for the aforementioned letter. Along with the return card is a print out from First Community Bank showing a pay to the order of James E. Davis check with an endorsement signature that resembles the signature on the formal complain form. Based upon our investigation, Staff has the following statements and/or recommendations: 1. Staff has had no contact with the Complainant during the complaint process. 2. Fast has issued a refund check in the amount of $70.00 to the Complainant and that check was sent certified mail to the Complainant in order to resolve this complaint. This $70.00 refund check is an amount greater than the amount that Staff would recommend in this case.

4 Case No E-C December 1,2015 Page 3 3. Staff recommends that Fast be reminded that each invoice should include all information required by the Commission s Motor Carrier Rule 5.2.e. 4. Staff recommends that Fast also be reminded that no charges should be made for services not included in Statewide Maximum Tariff unless Fast has received Commission approval through M.C. Tariff Form No Staff recommends that this case be dismissed. REWcm Attachment cws cbj\ap)a H:\RROBERTSON\2015 MEMOS\ DOCX

5 #- ~..~ = ri ~ pr. ul j i- Lk~l>&i PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA UTILITIES DMSION, STAFF FINAL MEMORANDUM 8 FROM: Jennifer Moore, Utilities Analyst Utilities Division DATE: November 23,2015 SUBJECT: CASE NO MC-FC James E. Davis V. Robert L. Hicks, dba Fast Action Towing and Recovery On September 2, 2015, James E. Davis (Cornplainant) filed a Formal Complaint before the Public Service Commission of West Virginia (Commission) against Robert L. Hicks, dba Fast Action Towing and Recovery (Fast - Defendants). The Complaint states that Complainant believes he was overcharged. Along with the complaint, the Complainant submitted a copy of the invoice. Fast filed its Answer to the formal complaint on September 14, 2015 with the Commission. Fast believes the charges Complainant received were more than fair and that Fast tried to accommodate the Complainant. Fast is currently operating from a Commission approved tariff effective October 3, 2014 from Case No MC- TOW. Utility Staff reviewed an itemized invoice submitted by Fast for $ The breakdown (which actually equals $258.40) is as follows: Towing charge $ Fuel Surcharge $ ($ * 6.265%) Special Equip. $ (Snatch Blocks & Skates) Second Tow $ Storage $ ($25.00 storage plus $1 SO WV Sales Tax) In reviewing the invoice, Utility Staff determined that the second tow in the amount of $50.00 should be considered a private tow and is outside the jurisdiction of the Commission. Based on Fast s current Commission approved tariff, the towing charge in the amount of $ is calculated correctly if the tow time was two (2) hours. However, based on the information on the invoice, Utility Staff is unable to determine the amount of time due to missing information such as the start and fish times required by e. Fast charged a fuel surcharge for the towing charge of $ plus the second tow of $50.00 for a total of $ times a 6.265% factor. Although the Commission has approved a fuel surcharge rate effective June 2015 through December 2015 of 5.26% for wrecker operators to implement in case MC G.O for actual tow

Case # 15-1447-E Davis v Fast Action Page 2 of 3 or equipment used that is powered by fuel, Fast did not file the appropriate fuel surcharge supplement form with the Commission at the time of this

6 Case # E Davis v Fast Action Page 2 of 3 or equipment used that is powered by fuel, Fast did not file the appropriate fuel surcharge supplement form with the Commission at the time of this tow and therefore cannot charge the fuel surcharge amount of $ Fast has since filed the appropriate supplement form and is authorized to charge the fuel surcharge rate of 5.26%. The next charge of $30.00 is for specialized equipment. Fast explained in its Answer to the formal complaint filed with the Commission on September 14, 2015 that this charge was for snatch blocks and skates. Based on Fast s Commission approved tarif however, there are no specialized equipment listed or rates approved. Without prior approval, Fast cannot charge $30.00 for the specialized equipment. Fast has filed a application to request rates with the Commission in order to correct this issue. The last charge for storage was charged at a rate of $25.00 per day plus WV sales tax of 6% for a total of $ Utility Staff spoke with a Fast representative who stated that she believed the vehicle to be stored outside; Utility Staff explained that inside storage is usually at the request of owner or law enforcement or at the discretion of the wecker company in order to reduce additional damage to the vehicle. As explained in the Rules and Regulations included in Fast s tariff, storage is calculated at each twenty-four (24) hour period commencing at the start of the next business day and shall apply only if the vehicle has not been retrieved before the carrier s normal close of business on the day the vehicle is delivered. Fast s answer stated that the vehicle was stored for two days but only charged for one. Based on the aforementioned calculation, Fast would be authorized to charge for one day storage at a rate of $15.00 for outside storage. Based on Utility Staffs review of the invoice compared to Fast s Commission approved tariff, the total charges should be $ which shows Fast overcharged by $ The breakdown is as follows. Towing Charge $ Storage $ Second Tow $ However, Fast has submitted a copy of a letter along with a copy of a check in the amount of $70.00 that was issued to Complainant and filed with the Commission on November 5, The letter states that Fast has tried on numerous occasions to contact Complainant but has been unable to reach him. The letter further states that in order to resolve this matter a check in the amount of $70.00 is enclosed and by cashing the enclosed check, Complainant is agreeing to the resolution.

7 Case # E-C Davis v Fast Action Page 3 of 3 Utility Staff has also tried on multiple occasions to contact Complainant, leaving messages with a female individual and on voice mail but have not had any return calls. A Data Request was also issued on October 30, 2015 requesting a copy of the accident report fiom Complainant that has not been received by Commission. Fast submitted to Utility Staff a copy of a certified mail return card that shows Complainant signed for the aforementioned letter. Along with the return card is a print out &om First Community Bank showing a pay to the order of James E. Davis check with an endorsement signature that resembles the signature on the formal complaint form. Utility Staff has had no contact with Complainant. Fast has issued a refund check to the Complainant in an amount geater than the amount Utility Staff would recommend. Therefore, Utility Staff is recommending this case be dismissed. Utility Staff is also recommending that Fast be reminded that each invoice should include all information required by $ e. Utility Staff is reminding Fast that no charges should be made for services not included in Statewide Maximum Tariff unless Company has received Commission approval through M.C. Tariff Form No. 11.

Pu6Gic Service Commission Of West Virginia

Pu6Gic Service Commission Of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street, (1. 0. Box 812 Charceston, west Virginia 25323 Phone: (304) 340-0300 FAX: (304) 340-0325 June 18,2008 John Miller, General Manager CRB & Sons,