Y-2Correspondence between Appellant, NSPI, and DRO (redacted)
7 passages
DRO 2 Feb re Uday Yadav billing dispute From Penney, Nicole Date Wed 18-Mar-261:49 PM To Cc Wallace. Lisa
AI summary An email from Nicole Penney to Lisa Wallace references a billing dispute involving Uday Yadav under a regulatory proceeding (DRO 2 Feb). The communication appears to be an internal notification or coordination related to the dispute.
Statement of Confidentiality This message (including any attachments) may contain private or protected information meant for a specific person or organization. If you received this by mistake, please let the sender know, do not communicate...
AI summary A confidentiality notice accompanies an email regarding a billing dispute involving Uday Yadav, forwarded by the Energy and Regulatory Boards Tribunal to Nicole Penney and Lisa Wallace. The email emphasizes handling sensitive information and includes a reference to a prior matter ('ORO 2 Feb') related to the dispute.
Hi there, I had a dispute over my last invoice, and NS Power had accepted that they did not adjust my December bill amount . In resolution It was concluded I won't be paying excessive estimated amount . Now PS Power keep asking me to pay t...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes a $902.60 bill from PS Power for an excessive December 2025 estimation, claiming NS Power previously acknowledged the error. Despite prior resolution, PS Power continues to demand payment, leading to ongoing billing disputes.
To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] From: Uday Yadav Subject: Re: DRO 31 Jan re Uday Yadav billing dispute Dear Teri and Mr. Farmer, Thank you for your detailed explanation regarding the November and January...
AI summary The customer disputes the handling of their November 2025 electricity bill, which was not adjusted after they provided an accurate meter reading. The customer claims they were informed they owed only $205, which they paid, but the original estimated amount was carried forward, leading to an unexpected $292.67 charge on their February bill. The customer refuses to pay the unadjusted amount and requests a correction.
Uday Yadav Per the immediately following detailed email, this matter appears to me to be appropriately addressed by N.S.Power, and fully resolved with your fully reconciled 14 Jan 2026 bill – "The customer's meter was read on January 14, 2...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes being charged again for a previously paid amount, with NS Power asserting the matter was resolved via a reconciled bill on January 14, 2026. The DRO seeks confirmation to close the file or issue a final decision. NS Power explains billing discrepancies stemmed from a cyber incident, using estimated readings until meters were reconnected.
Please provide me with N.S.Power's position in the matter as well as copies of relevant account statements and relevant computerized notes or notices. Don Farmer, P.Eng. Dispute Resolution Officer From: Uday Yadav Sent: January 27, 2026 2:...
AI summary A customer, Uday Yadav, is disputing a recent bill from NS Power, claiming that they were charged for an amount already paid in December. He highlights discrepancies in estimated billing and requests NS Power to revise their estimation process to prevent such issues.
I would like to bring to your attention that I paid my previous bill on October 14th, yet I am still being charged for 128 days, from July to November. As a result, I am effectively paying both the Base Charge and the Energy Charge twice f...
AI summary The customer reports being charged twice for the same billing period, from July to November, despite having already paid their previous bill on October 14th. They mention this issue has occurred before and express concern about the billing software and the financial burden caused by duplicate charges.
Y-3DRO Decision (redacted)
11 passages
er's day-to-day operations. My Decisions are binding on Nova Scotia Power but not on the Customer. Customers may appeal my Decisions (within 12 days of receipt of Final Written Decision) to the Board. Your Dispute in summary is: that you h...
AI summary The customer disputes a bill based on estimated meter readings and claims financial difficulty in paying. The process for reconciling estimated readings with actual readings is explained, and relevant Board regulations are referenced.
Don Farmer, P. Eng., Dispute Resolution Officer (D.R.O.) Telephone (902) 428-6202, Toll-free 1-877-428-6202, Fax (902) 835-7744 [email protected] Uday Yadav To: After review and consideration of all of the following and attach...
AI summary Customer Uday Yadav disputes a $902.60 NSP bill, citing estimated meter readings and affordability issues. The DRO clarifies their role in resolving disputes over NSP's application of Board regulations, noting decisions are binding on NSP but not customers. The dispute centers on reconciling estimated vs. actual meter readings and affordability of the $202.92 charge.
Don Farmer, P.Eng. Dispute Resolution Officer From: Uday Yadav Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2026 1:59 PM To: Penney, Nicole Cc: Wallace, Lisa ; 'Dispute Resolution Officer Don Farmer,P.Eng' Subject: Re: M12756 DRO 2 Feb re Uday Yadav billing...
AI summary Uday Yadav resubmits a PDF containing email trails related to a billing dispute (M12756), noting that the Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) closed the file. The decision details are on pages 3 and 4 of the document.
Hi there, I had a dispute over my last invoice, and NS Power had accepted that they did not adjust my December bill amount. In resolution It was concluded I won't be paying excessive estimated amount. Now PS Power keep asking me to pay tha...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes repeated billing from NS Power for an unresolved December 2025 overcharge, citing financial strain and mental distress. NS Power's Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) closed the case, but Yadav insists the issue remains unresolved.
The bill I received in February included an estimated usage that hasn't been adjusted, and I am now being asked to pay this estimation. They estimated my usage at 3,907 kWh, which is significantly higher than my actual usage of 1,560 kWh....
AI summary The customer received a bill with an unadjusted estimated usage of 3,907 kWh, leading to a charge of $497.67. The customer disputes this as it is significantly higher than their actual usage of 1,560 kWh and believes this is a recurring issue with NSPower's billing practices.
o pay such a high amount. This seems to be a recurring issue with my recent invoices, where NSPower charges significantly more than what is justified by my actual usage under the guise of estimation. My concern is that I am unable to pay t...
AI summary Customer Uday Yadav disputes NSP charges of $292.67, claiming they are based on estimated usage rather than actual meter readings. NSP asserts the January 14, 2026 bill was reconciled with a meter read. DRO Don Farmer seeks confirmation and threatens a final decision if unresolved.
as been granted on subject account# The first attachment is a copy of the account ledger for the subject account. The second attachment is a copy of the meter reads obtained for the subject account. We are continuing to work on restoring a...
AI summary The text outlines billing disruptions caused by a cyber incident affecting NS Power's metering system. Customers received estimated bills, with adjustments to be made once actual readings are processed. The May bill was estimated at 1392 kWh with a charge of $296.71, and NS Power assures customers will not be overcharged for unused power.
March 12 to May 14, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 63 31651.13 30259.13 1 Your hill wa e ostimat ed for this r period The customers July bill was based on a true read....
AI summary A customer received a refund of $296.71 for overcharged energy usage (1392 kWh) between March 12 and May 14, 2025, with the July bill covering service from March 12 to July 9, 2025. The refund included base and energy charges, while the July bill was based on a true meter read.
March 12 to July 9, 2025 2101426 02B 63 31651.13 30259.13 1 1392- The customers September bill was based on an estimated meter read. It was estimated for 1560 kWh and the Energy charge and the base charge combined was $327.89.
AI summary A customer's September bill was calculated using an estimated meter read of 1560 kWh, resulting in a combined energy and base charge of $327.89. The text highlights billing based on estimated readings rather than actual meter data.
July 9 to Sept 15, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 68 34916.00 33356.00 1 1560 Your bill wa s estimat ed for this p period Energy charges: Base Charge $19.17/month 38.3...
AI summary A customer's November bill was based on an estimated meter read, resulting in a charge for 3907 kWh. They were later refunded $327.89 for the previously billed 1560 kWh (July 9–Sept 15, 2025), covering base and energy charges. The refund reflects overcharging due to the estimated read.
Dispute Resolution Officer From: Uday Yadav Sent: January 27, 2026 2:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Fw: Previously Paid Amount is charged again in new Bill Hi there, I recently received my bill, and I noticed that it inc...
AI summary Uday Yadav is disputing a billing error where he was charged an additional amount in February for a period already paid in December. He highlights concerns about inaccurate estimated billing and requests a revision of the estimation process to prevent unfair charges.
Y-4NSPI Response to Appeal (redacted)
7 passages
tial Attachment 3 Invoices Please accept the following summary of activities and communications pertaining to the March 25, 2026 DRO decision being appealed by Mr. Yadav. April 14, 2026 L. Wallace - On or about March 16, 2026 Mr. Yadav rec...
AI summary Mr. Yadav is appealing a DRO decision regarding discrepancies in his electricity bills, including estimated reads and a significant increase in consumption between January and March 2026. NS Power issued bills based on estimated reads for September and November 2025, leading to a reconciliation bill in January 2026. The March 2026 bill showed nearly double the consumption compared to prior periods but aligned with the previous year's usage.
Date Usage Previous Payment Balance Current Total (kWh) Balance ($) Charges ($) Amount ($) Owing ($) January 14, 2633 288.23 -288.23 0.00 532.13 532.13 2025 March 12, 3115 532.13 -532.13 0.00 638.23 638.23 2025 May 14, 1392 638.23 -638.23...
AI summary The document outlines a series of payment and balance entries for a customer from January 2025 to March 2026, showing fluctuations in energy usage, payments made, and outstanding balances. Mr. Yadav formally disputed his January 2026 bill with the DRO.
April 14, 2026 L. Wallace 2026 bill. This is referenced on page 18 of 38 in the DRO file attached as Confidential Attachment 1 . - January 27, 2026 The DRO responded to the customer and NS Power. He summarized his role and asked NS Power t...
AI summary The DRO is handling a 2026 billing matter involving NS Power and a customer affected by a cyber incident. NS Power explained that billing was based on estimated meter reads prior to the incident and assured that discrepancies would be corrected in future bills.
March 12 to May 14, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 63 31651.13 30259.13 1 1392 The customer's July bill was based on a true read. The July bill was billed for service...
AI summary The customer received a refund for an overcharge on their electricity bill, which was based on incorrect meter readings. The refund included both base and energy charges for the period from March 12 to May 14, 2025, and the corrected bill reflected the accurate usage of 3097 kWh.
NS Power attached the account ledger and meter reads for the subject account ( . This is referenced on pages 15-16 of 38 in the DRO file attached as Confidential Attachment 1 . - January 29, 2026 The DRO wrote to Mr. Yadav indicating that...
AI summary NS Power provided meter read data for a customer's account, and a dispute was raised by Mr. Yadav regarding billing accuracy. The DRO communicated with both NS Power and Mr. Yadav, and NS Power clarified the billing differences by referencing actual meter reads. Mr. Yadav expressed willingness to close the case but reserved the right to reopen it if prior bills were not corrected.
This is referenced at page 27 of 38 in Confidential Attachment 1 . • Month 25, 2026 – The DRO issued his Final Written Decision pertaining to this appeal, finding as follows: Specific bills can be other than expected if they are based on e...
AI summary The DRO issued a final decision in favor of NS Power, stating that billing based on estimated meter readings is appropriate and that any discrepancies are reconciled with actual readings. Mr. Yadav appealed the decision, but NS Power supports the DRO's ruling and offers flexible payment options.
r Care Centre to discuss flexible billing arrangements such as an interest-free payment plan. NS Power agrees with the DRO's decision that Mr. Yadav has been billed appropriately for his consumption. Please consider the enclosed informatio...
AI summary NS Power agrees with the DRO's decision regarding appropriate billing for Mr. Yadav's electricity consumption. Confidential attachments have been removed from the correspondence.
Y-5Appellants Response to NSPI (redacted)
27 passages
April 14, 2026 Lisa Wallace Chief Clerk of the Board Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board 1601 Lower Water Street, 3rd Floor Halifax, NS B3J 3S3 Subject: Rebuttal Submission - M12756 (Uday Yadav) - Request for Billing Adjustment Respected...
AI summary Uday Yadav submits a rebuttal in Matter M12756, disputing a $292.67 billing balance attributed to an estimation error by NS Power. He requests the Board to correct the error and issue a revised statement reflecting his $205 payment, emphasizing the dispute is about billing accuracy, not usage.
Subject: Re: Matter M12756 - Rebuttal to NS Power Response (Exhibit Y-4) - Request for Billing Adjustment To: Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board and other concerned parties From: Uday Yadav I submit this rebuttal in response to NS Power'...
AI summary The appellant is requesting a billing adjustment due to an administrative error by NS Power, which resulted in an incorrect balance of $292.67. NS Power admitted to not generating a corrected bill after the actual meter reading was provided, and the reconciliation process was not completed properly. The appellant asserts that the issue is not about consumption but an administrative failure to issue the corrected bill.
Requested remedy: - Order NS Power to adjust my account to remove the $292.67 that resulted from their failure to issue the corrected bill, and to issue a corrected statement showing the $205 payment and the corrected balance. - Alternativ...
AI summary The requestor seeks a remedy for NS Power's failure to issue a corrected bill, demanding removal of a $292.67 overcharge and confirmation of the $205 payment. The request highlights NS Power's omission in specifying a timeline for correction in their April 14, 2026 filing (Exhibit Y-4), and requests the Board to direct NS Power to provide a written confirmation of the adjustment date.
Date Usage (kWh) Previous Balance ($) Payment ($) Balance Current Charges ($) Total Amount Owing ($) January 14, 2025 2633 288.23 -288.23 0.00 532.13 532.13 March 12, 2025 3115 532.13 -532.13 0.00 638.23 638.23 May 14, 2025 1392 638.23 -63...
AI summary The table outlines a customer's billing history from 2025 to 2026, showing fluctuating energy usage, payments, and balances. A dispute was initiated on January 27, 2026, regarding the January 2026 bill, indicating potential discrepancies in charges or payments.
NS Power attached the account ledger and meter reads for the subject account . This is referenced on pages 15-16 of 38 in the DRO file attached as Confidential Attachment 1 . - January 29, 2026 The DRO wrote to Mr. Yadav indicating that NS...
AI summary NS Power provided meter reads and an account ledger for a customer dispute. The DRO communicated with Mr. Yadav regarding the reconciled January bill and the resolution of the matter. Mr. Yadav expressed willingness to close the case but reserved the right to reopen it if previous bills were not corrected. NS Power explained that discrepancies between estimated and actual usage would be reflected in future bills and provided specific meter read data.
Don Farmer, P. Eng., Dispute Resolution Officer (D.R.O.) Telephone (902) 428-6202, Toll-free 1-877-428-6202, Fax (902) 835-7744 [email protected] Uday Yadav After review and consideration of all of the following and attached,...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes a $202.92 charge on his 2026 N.S.Power bill, arguing estimated meter readings from Sept and Nov 2025 were reconciled after actual readings in July 2025 and Jan 2026. The Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) explains their role in resolving disputes under Board regulations 5.1 and 6.4, emphasizing affordability concerns and billing reconciliation procedures.
Don Farmer, P. Eng., Dispute Resolution Officer (D.R.O.) Telephone (902) 428-6202, Toll-free 1-877-428-6202, Fax (902) 835-7744 [email protected] Uday Yadav After review and consideration of all of the following and attached,...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes a $902.60 N.S.Power bill, citing estimated meter readings and affordability issues. The Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) clarifies their role in resolving disputes over Board-approved regulations, noting decisions are binding on N.S.Power but not customers. The customer argues that estimated readings were reconciled with actual meter data from July 2025 and January 2026.
Domestic Service from Jul 09 to Sep 15, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 68 34916.00 33356.00 1 1560
AI summary A domestic service billing record from July 9 to September 15, 2025, shows meter number 2101426 with rate code 02B, 68 days of service, and 1,560 kWh used, calculated from meter readings of 34,916.00 to 33,356.00.
Domestic Service from Jul 09 to Nov 14, 2025 Meter numbe No. of days Last meter read Multiplie kWh used Rate code 2101426 02B 37263.00 33356.00 128 3907 2101426 02B 68 34916.00 33356.00 1560- Service from _ omestic Jan 14, 20 26 Meter numb...
AI summary The document provides details of a customer's electricity usage from July 9 to November 14, 2025, including meter numbers, rate codes, and kWh used. The customer has been billed appropriately for the service provided.
N.S.Power Customer Relations Please see highlighted statements in the following email thread: NSP 30 Jan 11:59 pm DRO 31 Jan 11:36 pm Customer 2 Feb 12:21 pm DRO 2 Feb 3:28 pm NSEB 19 Mar 10:53 What is the current Account billing status ?...
AI summary An email thread involving NSP, the DRO, and a customer discusses a closed billing dispute. Don Farmer, the DRO, is contacted regarding the current account billing status, with the NSEB mentioned in the communication.
Hi there, I had a dispute over my last invoice, and NS Power had accepted that they did not adjust my December bill amount. In resolution It was concluded I won't be paying excessive estimated amount. Now PS Power keep asking me to pay tha...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes NS Power's attempt to bill him $902.60 for an excessive December estimate, despite a prior resolution stating he would not pay it. NS Power continues to demand payment, citing the unresolved billing issue.
[email protected] Uday Yadav I am closing my file on this matter. Don Farmer, P.Eng. Dispute Resolution Officer From: Uday Yadav Sent: February 2, 2026 12:21 PM To: [email protected] Cc: customerrelations@nspower....
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes NS Power's handling of his November 2025 electricity bill, which was not adjusted after he provided an accurate meter reading. He argues that an unexpected $292.67 charge on his February bill stems from an uncorrected error, placing him in a financial hardship. He requests a review and adjustment of the outstanding amount.
[email protected] Uday Yadav; N.S.Power Udav Please clarify your reference to February 1 bill. N.S.Power Please address the Customer concern re "being asked to pay an additional $292.67, which is my main concern." in the conte...
AI summary Uday Yadav is concerned about being charged an additional $292.67 on his February bill. He previously contacted customer service and was informed that he only needed to pay the actual bill amount of $205, not the estimated $497.67.
Regards Uday Yadav From: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2026 10:55 AM To: Cc: [email protected] Subject: DRO 29 Jan re Uday Yadav re dispute re Previously Paid Amount is charged again in new Bill Don...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes a billing issue where a previously paid amount was recharged in a new bill. The email is addressed to NS Power's customer relations and references Dispute Resolution Officer Don Farmer. The matter involves a billing discrepancy under the DRO process.
Uday Yadav Per the immediately following detailed email, this matter appears to me to be appropriately addressed by N.S.Power, and fully resolved with your fully reconciled 14 Jan 2026 bill – "The customer's meter was read on January 14, 2...
AI summary NS Power asserts the billing discrepancy was resolved with the January 14, 2026 reconciled bill, citing meter reads post-cyber incident. The DRO seeks confirmation to close the file or issue a final decision. NS Power explains estimated billing during the cyber incident and ongoing meter reconnection efforts.
Please provide me with N.S.Power's position in the matter as well as copies of relevant account statements and relevant computerized notes or notices. Don Farmer, P.Eng. Dispute Resolution Officer From: Uday Yadav Sent: January 27, 2026 2:...
AI summary Uday Yadav is disputing a billing error where he was charged again for an amount already paid in December. He received an updated bill in February that included an additional charge of $292.67, which he believes is not reflective of his actual usage. He also mentions issues with the estimation process and frequent high bills.
RE: DRO 29 Jan re Uday Yadav re dispute re charged again in new Bill From Customer Relations Date Fri 30 Jan 26 11:58 AM To [email protected] Cc ; Customer Relations
AI summary A dispute arises regarding Uday Yadav being charged again in a new bill. The email, sent by NS Power's Customer Relations, references a DRO proceeding on January 29 and seeks resolution for the recurring charges.
Mr Farmer, When the customer contacted NS Power on November 18, 2025, a read was provided by the customer. The read provided was 36199. The customer care representative advised the bill would have been for 1283 kWh or approximately $205.00...
AI summary A customer disputes a billing error by NS Power, where an incorrect meter read in November 2025 led to an undercharged bill. The customer paid $205 based on the incorrect read, but a subsequent correct read in January 2026 revealed a higher usage, leaving the customer owing 2706 kWh. NS Power did not correct the original bill but informed the customer of the correct amount later, causing confusion in billing allocations.
Uday Yaday After review and consideration of all of the following and attached, my Final Written Decision in the matter follows. I will begin with my Role Statement as Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) in matters of dispute between N.S.Powe...
AI summary Uday Yaday, as Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO), addresses a customer's dispute over a $902.60 N.S.Power bill, citing estimated meter readings and affordability concerns. The customer disputes a $202.92 charge, arguing reconciliation of estimated readings with actual usage from July 2025 to January 2026. Board Regulations 5.1 and 6.4 are referenced.
eedful. From: Uday Yadav Sent: Monday, February 2, 2026 3:59 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: DRO 2 Feb re Uday Yadav billing dispute Uday Yadav From: [email protected] Sent:...
AI summary Uday Yadav disputes NS Power's billing practices, claiming an uncorrected November 2025 estimate led to an unexpected $292.67 charge on his February 2026 invoice. He asserts he was advised the corrected amount was $205, which he paid, but NS Power failed to adjust the bill, creating a financial hardship.
From: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2026 2:21 PM ; [email protected] Subject: DRO 29 Jan re Uday Yadav re dispute re charged again in new Bill Don Farmer, P. Eng., Dispute Resolution Officer (D.R.O.)...
AI summary Uday Yadav is disputing a charge of an additional $292.67 on his February bill, which he claims was previously paid. He references his December invoice of $497.67 and provides images of the bills for clarification. The Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) is involved in addressing the concern.
Uday Yadav From: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2026 10:55 AM To: Cc: [email protected] Subject: DRO 29 Jan re Uday Yadav re dispute re Previously Paid Amount is charged again in new Bill Don Farmer,...
AI summary Uday Yadav is disputing a billing issue where a previously paid amount was charged again in a new bill. The Dispute Resolution Officer, Don Farmer, has reviewed the matter and believes it is resolved with the customer's reconciled bill dated January 14, 2026. The customer is asked to confirm agreement to close the file or face a final written decision.
The second attachment is a copy of the meter reads obtained for the subject account. We are continuing to work on restoring all regular services to our customers following the cyber incident. Meters are now being reconnected to our billing...
AI summary The document discusses the impact of a cyber incident on billing processes, including estimated meter reads and the restoration of regular services. Customers received estimated bills prior to the incident, and actual usage will be reflected in future bills as meters are reconnected.
March 12 to May 14, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 63 31651.13 30259.13 1 1392 Your bill wa s estimat ed for this r period The customers July bill was based on a true...
AI summary A customer received a refund of $296.71 for overbilling between March 12 and May 14, 2025, due to an error in meter readings. The July bill was based on a true read, correcting the prior charge of 1392 kWh, with the refund covering base and energy charges.
March 12 to July 9, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 119 33356.00 30259.13 1 3097 2101426 02B 63 31651.13 30259.13 1 1392- The customers September bill was based on an e...
AI summary A customer's September bill was calculated using an estimated meter read of 1560 kWh, resulting in a combined energy and base charge of $327.89. The table shows two meter readings for account 2101426 with differing kWh usage over specific periods.
July 9 to Sept 15, 2025 Meter number Rate code No. of days New meter read Last meter read Multiplier kWh used 2101426 02B 68 34916.00 33356.00 1 The customers November bill was based on an estimated read. The November bill was billed for s...
AI summary The customer's November bill was based on an estimated meter read, resulting in a charge of 3907 kWh. A refund of 1560 kWh and $327.89 was issued for the previous billing period due to an overcharge. The customer received a refund covering both base and energy charges.
Now, I have received an invoice for February that requires me to pay an additional $292.67, which was never part of my actual usage. I would like to know why I am being charged this extra amount, especially since the new invoice is based o...
AI summary The customer received an invoice for February that includes an additional charge of $292.67, which they claim was not part of their actual usage. They are concerned about the fairness of the charge and the inconsistency in billing, especially since the new invoice is based on an actual reading.
102156NSEB (NSPI) IR-1 to IR-5
6 passages
Request IR-1: - The meter history provided by NS Power indicates: - An estimated read was used for the May 14, 2025, bill; - An actual read was obtained on July 9, 2025; and - Subsequent estimated reads were then used again for the Septemb...
AI summary The meter history shows NS Power used estimated reads for May 2025 and subsequent billing periods, obtained an actual read in July 2025, and then resumed estimated reads for September and November 2025 billing cycles.
Please explain: - a) How NS Power was able to obtain an actual meter read in July 2025 after estimating the May 2025 bill; - b) Why subsequent bills after July 2025 reverted to estimated readings; - c) Whether actual reads were unavailable...
AI summary The proceeding seeks clarification on NSP's billing practices in 2025, focusing on the transition from estimated to actual meter reads in July 2025, subsequent reversion to estimates, operational feasibility of actual reads, and customer notification regarding billing methods.
Request IR-2: - a) Please explain whether the July 9, 2025, actual meter read reset the customer's billing baseline for future reconciliations. - b) If so, explain why subsequent estimates following the July actual read were considered rea...
AI summary Request IR-2 asks whether the July 9, 2025 meter read reset a customer's billing baseline and whether subsequent estimates after this read were reasonable and reliable. The inquiry focuses on billing procedures and the methodology for reconciling meter data with estimated readings.
Request IR-3: - a) Please explain whether NS Power generated, a corrected/revised invoice after the customer submitted an actual meter read in November 2025. - b) If no corrected invoice was generated: - i. Explain why not; - ii. Explain w...
AI summary Request IR-3 seeks clarification from NS Power on whether a corrected invoice was generated after a customer submitted an actual meter read in November 2025, and if not, the reasons, consistency with standard practices during a cyber incident recovery period, and how customers were informed about balances carrying forward.
Request IR-4: - Please clarify whether the disputed $292.67 amount represents: - a) Previously consumed but unpaid electricity; or Document: 330390 Date Filed: 05/26/26 Page 2 b) A deferred reconciliation balance resulting from estimated b...
AI summary Request IR-4 seeks clarification on the disputed $292.67 amount, asking whether it represents unpaid electricity or a deferred reconciliation balance from estimated billing. The document is part of a regulatory proceeding involving Nova Scotia Power Inc.
Request IR-5: - Please explain the controls, customer communication measures, and billing safeguards - implemented during the cyber incident recovery period to minimize customer confusion arising - from estimated billing reconciliations. D...
AI summary Request IR-5 seeks clarification on measures taken during a cyber incident recovery period to address customer confusion related to estimated billing reconciliations, focusing on controls, communication strategies, and billing safeguards.