Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/09/2023

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I have been on the MUD even payment plan for years now all of a sudden, I am *** dollars in the red and now they raised my bill ** dollars a month!!!!!!!! ** DOLLARS A MONTH!!!!!! In the past they would send you a catch up bill never happened. In the past they would send you correspondence in the mail to explaining, Nothing!!! Now they push you to go electronic but yet they don't reach out to you? Then when you call the customer service line you get a ********** that states that is your bill handle it! Is MUD is that bad at estimating bills now? I really feel sorry for the folks that are just scraping by. Thanks to MUD they have just made it worse over night!
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/06/2023

  Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2023/01/27) */
  For customers who choose the budget billing plan, the calculation of the monthly payment amount is based upon several factors including the previous year's water and gas usage history, anticipated weather extremes (temperature and precipitation), and any rate increases for gas, water and/or sewer. At the end of a twelve-month period, a recalculation occurs which takes these factors into consideration and is aimed at predicting as accurately as possible what the customer's actual usage will be over the course of the following year. That amount is averaged to determine the monthly payment. When actual usage exceeds the averaged, monthly budget payment, then at the end of that 12-month cycle when the recalculation takes place, the customer is responsible for any resulting balance due (that was not captured by the previous year's budget plan payment) and it is typically rolled into the new recalculated budget payment to ease the burden on the ratepayer.
  
  In this case when the customer's budget billing plan was recalculated, it resulted in a higher monthly payment for the forthcoming year in part because it took into consideration an overage remaining from his previous year. The customer's main concern was reducing the higher monthly payment. A Customer Service Supervisor (with whom he requested to speak) explained to him that he could pay in a lump sum the overage due from the previous 12-month period upfront and she would also offer a **% reduction in the monthly payment, which would bring down the monthly budget bill to $*** which he accepted.
  
  In response to the customer's assertions in his BBB complaint, a Quality Assurance Supervisor listened to both of the customer's phone calls to Customer Service and detected no lack of professionalism in the exchanges by those with whom he spoke. In response to the customer's assertion that correspondence should have been sent notifying him about the higher recalculated payment, it was explained to him that all such information was in fact provided on the face of the billing statement and yellow highlighted in the upper corner.
  
  A Customer Engagement Specialist later followed up with the customer by phone to ensure his questions had been addressed and he was satisfied with the information she left him in a previous voicemail. She also left him her phone number should he have any further questions.
  
  We believe this matter has been addressed.
  
  
  Consumer Response /* (2000, 10, 2023/01/27) */
  (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
  Fine but when I talked to the first representative, he was not professional like she states. The second lady was really nice. The rep from MUD answering this complaint makes it sound like no big deal that it goes up ** ** dollars. So ** ** dollars a month from 300,000 people in ***** $$$$$$$$ way over pay!!! So yes close the complaint but she exemplifies MUD concept *******************************************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/23/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I was billed $****** on 8.12.22 for 12 days of usage. Previous month was $*** for 30 days. When i asked information on as to why- i was told that service tech will check the miter and i will be notified. The tech. was next day and replaced the miter and no gas leaks found. I was not notified of the results. So when i called again i was told that meter was changed but not my bill. So, I asked to investigate why my bill was $******. On my 3rd contact i was told by supervisor that electronic sending unit was bad, but meter reading was ok.How did they know that meter was good? When did the electronic sensor failed and for how long was it bad? There is a lot of unanswered questions about as to how this bill was fabricated. I'm asking management of MUD to investigate this complain.
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/21/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/10/10) */
  The customer presents two primary questions in his complaint concerning (1) billed charges; and (2) accuracy of the gas meter readings. Upon review, it has been determined that the failure of the ERT device (encoder, receiver, transmitter) on his gas meter resulted in an inaccurate reading of his gas usage but his final billed charges have been determined to be accurate.
  
  The customer misstated in his complaint that he was billed $*** on August 12, 2022 for twelve days of usage. In fact, he was billed $*** for the month of August. His bill for $*** represented a final bill after he had moved out of his residence in September and included the accumulated charges that had not been properly reported previously. The issue in this case centers on the failure of the ERT device that is on the gas meter which enables readings to be sent electronically via radio signals. The customer questioned whether the date of failure of the gas meter could be pinpointed and whether he was being charged fairly in the absence of that information. It is important to understand that the gas meter and the ERT are separate entities: the gas meter records the gas usage independent of the ERT transmission of that information. The ERT can fail for multiple reasons such as equipment failure, faulty signal, or radio interference, and it can fail while the gas meter continues to accurately record readings of gas usage. A 're-read of the gas meter' conducted on September 16th provided the basis for the customer's charges: the customer moved out with a gas meter reading of 1070 (while the ERT had incorrectly relayed a reading of 930) and he was subsequently billed appropriately for 140 CCF of gas. The gas meter was changed out on September 19th, was tested and found to be accurate.
  
  Despite the failure of the ERT device, it has been determined that this customer was billed correctly.