Smart Meter SCAM

PG&E’s recent comments to the  California Public Utility Commission that customers could have an analog meter option is a ‘better late than never’ concession, but we still have a long way to go to ensure public safety and restore consumer rights.

There has been no cost evaluation, no hearings, no fact finding and no cross examination by anyone on PG&E’s proposed fees to opt out.

The fees are ARBITRARY and intentionally PUNITIVE to discourage customers from opting out.

Considering customers were not provided full disclosure about the RF technology (which is an FCC rule) and the meters were forced upon consumers without consent or choice, there should be NO CHARGE to have the smart meters replaced with analogs.

The utilities removed perfectly functional equipment with an inferior product with a shorter expected “usefulness” and charged every customer through rate hikes.

If you have managed to fend off installation and kept your analog meter now they are trying to charge you again, $90 more, to keep what you already have!

This is a SCAM and a SCANDAL!  

They also want to charge a monthly fee of $11-15 ($5 CARE customers) to cover the costs of a meter reader.   In town it takes a meter reader a couple of minutes to read a meter per house per month.  It outlying areas, people have self read their own meters for years.   These fees are UNREALISTIC, ARBITRARY, AND INTENTIONALLY PUNITIVE!

9 thoughts on “Smart Meter SCAM”

  1. The inclusion of costs for a meter reader (in PGE’s opt-out charges) is outright fraud.

    Everyone was paying for a meter reader when everyone had an analog
    meter. Those who had a Smeter imposed on them did not see a decrease
    in their bill. Therefore, they are still contributing to PGE for a
    meter reader that they no longer need. Now, if PGE puts an analog
    meter back in, and charges for a meter reader, then that customer will
    be paying twice for a meter reader, the meter-reader costs from the
    old billing, and the meter-reader charge in the opt-out process. That
    is double billing, and is officially fraud.

    Steve Martinot

  2. How about we give the CPUC and PG&E something more than a just a
    refusal to pay their extortion fees. I think that we need to give them
    something in return so other customers would not feel they are paying
    for the extra expenses of our requirements and it would allow the CPUC
    to decide in our favor with clear conscience. Other proposals could be
    developed that would work. In “smart meter free zones” other simple
    plans could be developed.

    Proposal 1:

    The “small group” of opt-out people will offer to read their meters
    monthly and provide the readings to PG&E by the normal meter reading
    date. This way PG&E would not need to absorb the costs for meter
    readers especially in far flung areas. This is a practice they have
    allowed for years in certain situations.

    PG&E could audit these readings if they so desire.
    I also realize that the lack of fees would surely multiply the size “small group”
    many times over.

  3. We need to demand that utilities put up or shut up: unless PGE delivers
    a rate reduction to consumers for meter-reading savings, it has no
    basis to claim any meter-reading fee at all for smartmeter opt-outs.
    The charge for opt-outs is predicated on the claim that smartmeters
    save the cost of meter reading. Where’s a shred of evidence for that?
    I went through all the rate changes back to 2009, there are lots of
    increases totalling over $1 billion and zero savings for meter-reading.
    Details at
    smartmeter fallacies

    There are also other zero to low cost alternatives PGE must be required
    to offer.

    In other states consumers can read their own meters or get estimated bills,
    and utilities are only required to read meters twice a year, which makes the
    cost inconsequential.
    [ ]

    The postal service already has people visiting every residence and business.
    Contracting them to read meters would have miniscule incremental cost,
    even if opt-outs are widely scattered.

  4. From the SF Chronicle, by Alexander Binik, Fairfax

    Let PG&E pay the tab

    Trying desperately to spin charging extortionate monthly fees to customers who don’t want smart meters, PG&E’s corporate CEO says, “Somebody has to pay that cost” but never explains why PG&E itself can’t pay it (“Reversal over new meters by PG&E,” Dec. 20).

    Using clever accounting tricks, the company makes hundreds of millions of dollars in extra profits annually simply through operating its smart meter program – by eliminating meter-reader positions and by adding the smart meters’ multibillion-dollar value (paid for completely by ratepayers) to the corporation’s own asset base. Why not disgorge a small amount of those windfall profits, so customers – already forced to pay hundreds of dollars for each smart meter they didn’t want – don’t have to pay still more every month, forever, to avoid having smart gas and electric meters?

    For many decades PG&E hasn’t charged even a penny extra for installing or reading the analog meters we have all had. They have no adequate excuse for doing so now. Clearly the fees’ actual primary purpose is to discourage customers from opting out of smart meters and convincing their neighbors to do the same. Secondarily, these fees would bring even more profits to this greedy corporation. We must insist: No fees for opting out!

  5. Michael R. Peevey President, Timothy Alan Simon Commissioner, Michel Peter Florio
    Commissioner, Catherine J.K. Sandoval, Commissioner Mark J. Ferron are the people that voted, they were appointed by Governor Brown, so they are all democrats.
    I suggest filing a ripoffreport, scam, consumer complaint sites online, title their names on the heading sich as ripoffreport then update it the next day, then pling it, then if then if you want, buy powerful backlinks like anywhere from Pr4’s to Pr9’s on Ebay, just provide the URL of the ripoffreport links with the keywords of the all the commissioner names, how they scammed Californian’s by favoring PG&E to charge for smart meters, their names will be on top of the search engines especially when they are out of office, everybody will know who made Californian’s pay more for the scam Smart Meter issues, these people. Also post a Youtube video of outrage to these people.

  6. They claim smart meters are more efficient for us and them, I understand it sounds that way. So why do I have to pay for a service I have had for years with no charge, when they’re saving tons of money from the smart meters. So some one tell me where’s the money their supposedly saving going not to us the customers. If they’re saving money why do they fine us 75$ plus 10$ a month for something that was included before, or as they like to call for a choice. Sounds like they’re beating the crap out of us with their wallets and power to me.

  7. Here is a thought with the proliferation of smartphones and tablets why not just let customers send a photograph of the meter in to be read by the company

  8. Just curious…do all of you who are so concerned about the physical effects of the radio waves also eat only organic whole foods, never processed foods?

    It just seems to me that there are multiple factors in modern life that might be contributing to a lack of well-being. If you’re eating McDonald’s while complaining about these meters, I question whether you are really taking a full view of things.

Comments are closed.